Sent: Monday, November 11, 2019 15:55
To: Hebenstreit, Michael
Cc: Mohr Jr, Richard Frank ; lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] changing inode size on MDT
You can check the ashift of the zpool via "zpool get all | grep ashift". If
this is different, it will m
;
Cc: Mohr Jr, Richard Frank mailto:rm...@utk.edu>>;
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org<mailto:lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] changing inode size on MDT
There isn't really enough information to make any kind of real analysis.
My guess would be that
0
thanks
Michael
From: Andreas Dilger
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2019 14:42
To: Hebenstreit, Michael
Cc: Mohr Jr, Richard Frank ; lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] changing inode size on MDT
There isn't really enough information to make any kind of real ana
enstreit, Michael
mailto:michael.hebenstr...@intel.com>>
Cc: Mohr Jr, Richard Frank mailto:rm...@utk.edu>>;
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org<mailto:lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] changing inode size on MDT
On Oct 3, 2019, at 20:09, Hebenstreit, Michael
m
@lists.lustre.org
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] changing inode size on MDT
On Oct 3, 2019, at 20:09, Hebenstreit, Michael
mailto:michael.hebenstr...@intel.com>> wrote:
So bottom line – don’t change the default values, it won’t get better?
Like I wrote previously, there *are* no default/tunable val
du>>;
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org<mailto:lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] changing inode size on MDT
On Oct 3, 2019, at 05:03, Hebenstreit, Michael
mailto:michael.hebenstr...@intel.com>> wrote:
So you are saying on a zfs based Lustre there is no
So bottom line - don't change the default values, it won't get better?
From: Andreas Dilger
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2019 19:38
To: Hebenstreit, Michael
Cc: Mohr Jr, Richard Frank ; lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] changing inode size on MDT
On Oct 3
day, October 02, 2019 18:49
To: Hebenstreit, Michael
mailto:michael.hebenstr...@intel.com>>
Cc: Mohr Jr, Richard Frank mailto:rm...@utk.edu>>;
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org<mailto:lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] changing inode size on MDT
There are several confusin
: Thursday, October 03, 2019 05:41
To: Degremont, Aurelien ; Hebenstreit, Michael
; Andreas Dilger
Cc: lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] changing inode size on MDT
Hi,
A little pedantic but for ‘inodes’ don’t exist in a zfs pool per-se. So the
code which attempts to report
6:11 PM
To: "Hebenstreit, Michael" , Andreas Dilger
Cc: "lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org"
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] changing inode size on MDT
As Andreas said "it is not relevant for ZFS since ZFS dynamically allocates
inodes and blocks as needed"
"as needed&
re-discuss@lists.lustre.org"
Objet : Re: [lustre-discuss] changing inode size on MDT
So you are saying on a zfs based Lustre there is no way to increase the number
of available inodes? I have 8TB MDT with roughly 17G inodes
[root@elfsa1m1 ~]# df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mou
2, 2019 18:49
To: Hebenstreit, Michael
Cc: Mohr Jr, Richard Frank ; lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] changing inode size on MDT
There are several confusing/misleading comments on this thread that need to be
clarified...
On Oct 2, 2019, at 13:45, Hebenstrei
There are several confusing/misleading comments on this thread that need to be
clarified...
On Oct 2, 2019, at 13:45, Hebenstreit, Michael
mailto:michael.hebenstr...@intel.com>> wrote:
http://wiki.lustre.org/Lustre_Tuning#Number_of_Inodes_for_MDS
Note that I've updated this page to reflect cur
> On Oct 2, 2019, at 3:45 PM, Hebenstreit, Michael
> wrote:
>
> and I'd like to use --mkfsoptions='-i 1024' to have more inodes in the MDT.
> We already run out of inodes on that FS (probably due to an ZFS bug in early
> IEEL version) - so I'd like to increase #inodes if possible
I don’t th
due to an ZFS bug in
> early IEEL version) - so I'd like to increase #inodes if possible
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mohr Jr, Richard Frank
> Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2019 13:39
> To: Hebenstreit, Michael
> Cc: lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
> Subje
ible
-Original Message-
From: Mohr Jr, Richard Frank
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2019 13:39
To: Hebenstreit, Michael
Cc: lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] changing inode size on MDT
> On Oct 2, 2019, at 1:08 PM, Hebenstreit, Michael
> wrote:
>
&
> On Oct 2, 2019, at 1:08 PM, Hebenstreit, Michael
> wrote:
>
> Could anyone point out to me what the downside of having an inode size of 1k
> on the MDT would be (compared to the 4k default)?
Are you talking about the inode size, or the “-i” option to mkfs.lustre (which
actually controls t
: [lustre-discuss] changing inode size on MDT
It's too small to accommodate new features
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 11:08 AM Hebenstreit, Michael
mailto:michael.hebenstr...@intel.com>> wrote:
Could anyone point out to me what the downside of having an inode size of 1k on
the MDT would be (
It's too small to accommodate new features
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 11:08 AM Hebenstreit, Michael <
michael.hebenstr...@intel.com> wrote:
> Could anyone point out to me what the downside of having an inode size of
> 1k on the MDT would be (compared to the 4k default)?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Michael
>
>
Could anyone point out to me what the downside of having an inode size of 1k on
the MDT would be (compared to the 4k default)?
Thanks
Michael
Michael Hebenstreit Senior Cluster Architect
Intel Corporation, M
20 matches
Mail list logo
