ion.
>> The OST will be RAID 6 and proposed are 2 OST.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 7:55 PM, Ben Evans wrote:
>>
>>> How many OST's are behind that OSS? How many MDT's behind the MDS?
>>>
>>> From: lustre-discuss on
>>
;> of Brian Andrus
>> Date: Monday, October 30, 2017 at 12:24 PM
>> To: "lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org"
>> Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] 1 MDS and 1 OSS
>>
>> Hmm. That is an odd one from a quick thought...
>>
>> However, IF you are plann
On Oct 31, 2017, at 07:35, Andrew Elwell wrote:
>
>
>
> On 31 Oct. 2017 07:20, "Dilger, Andreas" wrote:
>>
>> Having a larger MDT isn't bad if you plan future expansion. That said, you
>> would get better performance over FDR if you used SSDs for the MDT rather
>> than HDDs (if you aren't
On 31 Oct. 2017 07:20, "Dilger, Andreas" wrote:
Having a larger MDT isn't bad if you plan future expansion. That said, you
would get better performance over FDR if you used SSDs for the MDT rather
than HDDs (if you aren't already planning this), and for a single OSS you
probably don't need the
On Oct 31, 2017, at 05:46, Mohr Jr, Richard Frank (Rick Mohr)
wrote:
>
>> On Oct 30, 2017, at 4:46 PM, Brian Andrus wrote:
>>
>> Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but that seems a bit large of an
>> MDT. Of course drives these days are pretty good sized, so the extra is
>> probably ve
> On Oct 30, 2017, at 4:46 PM, Brian Andrus wrote:
>
> Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but that seems a bit large of an
> MDT. Of course drives these days are pretty good sized, so the extra is
> probably very inexpensive.
That probably depends on what the primary usage will be. If
muc...@gmail.com>>
Date: Monday, October 30, 2017 at 12:24 PM
To: "lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
<mailto:lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org>"
mailto:lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org>>
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] 1 MDS and 1 OSS
Hmm. That is an od
t;
Cc: Ben Evans mailto:bev...@cray.com>>,
"lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org<mailto:lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org>"
mailto:lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org>>
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] 1 MDS and 1 OSS
Hi,
If everything is connected with SAS JBOD and controllers, you
many OST's are behind that OSS? How many MDT's behind the MDS?
>>
>> From: lustre-discuss on behalf
>> of Brian Andrus
>> Date: Monday, October 30, 2017 at 12:24 PM
>> To: "lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org"
>> Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss]
n behalf
> of Brian Andrus
> Date: Monday, October 30, 2017 at 12:24 PM
> To: "lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org"
> Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] 1 MDS and 1 OSS
>
> Hmm. That is an odd one from a quick thought...
>
> However, IF you are planning on growing and addi
nd MDS. You would need 2 nos of
> MDS and 2 nos of OSS (identical configuration).
> > Also use latest Lustre 2.10.1 release.
> >
> > Regards
> > Ravi Konila
> >
> >
> >> From: Amjad Syed
> >> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 1:17 PM
> >&
e.org<mailto:lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org>"
mailto:lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org>>
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] 1 MDS and 1 OSS
Hmm. That is an odd one from a quick thought...
However, IF you are planning on growing and adding OSSes/OSTs, this is not a
bad way to get sta
Hmm. That is an odd one from a quick thought...
However, IF you are planning on growing and adding OSSes/OSTs, this is
not a bad way to get started and used to how everything works. It is
basically a single stripe storage.
If you are not planning on growing, I would lean towards gluster on 2
> It is better to go for HA for both OSS and MDS. You would need 2 nos of MDS
> and 2 nos of OSS (identical configuration).
> Also use latest Lustre 2.10.1 release.
>
> Regards
> Ravi Konila
>
>
>> From: Amjad Syed
>> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 1:17 PM
of
> MDS and 2 nos of OSS (identical configuration).
> Also use latest Lustre 2.10.1 release.
>
> Regards
> *Ravi Konila*
>
>
> *From:* Amjad Syed
> *Sent:* Monday, October 30, 2017 1:17 PM
> *To:* lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
> *Subject:* [lustre-discuss] 1 MDS
: [lustre-discuss] 1 MDS and 1 OSS
Hello
We are in process in procuring one small Lustre filesystem giving us 120 TB of
storage using Lustre 2.X.
The vendor has proposed only 1 MDS and 1 OSS as a solution.
The query we have is that is this configuration enough , or we need more OSS?
The MDS and OSS
Hello
We are in process in procuring one small Lustre filesystem giving us 120
TB of storage using Lustre 2.X.
The vendor has proposed only 1 MDS and 1 OSS as a solution.
The query we have is that is this configuration enough , or we need more
OSS?
The MDS and OSS server are identical with regard
17 matches
Mail list logo
