From carrier at cray.com Thu Nov 3 13:04:47 2011 From: carrier at cray.com (John Carrier) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 08:04:47 -0500 Subject: [Twg] no TWG meeting today Message-ID: Dave and I both have conflicts and will be unable to host the TWG call today. --jc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carrier at cray.com Fri Nov 4 17:20:03 2011 From: carrier at cray.com (John Carrier) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 12:20:03 -0500 Subject: [Twg] TWG meeting at SC11 Message-ID: I have a meeting room reserved at the Sheraton Hotel, which is a block away from the convention center, for Monday 11/14, from 1:30-4:00. The room holds 25. At this point, I have ~10 confirmations. There will be a speaker phone available, so we can use the same numbers as our weekly calls for those unable to attend SC11 in person. Please send agenda topics to the list. --jc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Nathan_Rutman at xyratex.com Fri Nov 4 19:13:41 2011 From: Nathan_Rutman at xyratex.com (Nathan Rutman) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 12:13:41 -0700 Subject: [Twg] [wc-discuss] Lustre 1.8.7-wc1 released In-Reply-To: <4EB3E10B.7080107@whamcloud.com> References: <4EB3E10B.7080107@whamcloud.com> Message-ID: <73AED5C780AE05478241DB067651A9210237894C@XYUS-EX22.xyus.xyratex.com> Hi Peter - thanks. Should these types of announcements also go out to lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org and discuss at lists.opensfs.org? I hate the fact that there are now 3 lists where there used to be one -- the fact of the matter is that all 3 lists are open, so it's really not about control. Can we possibly just redirect all messages from two of the lists to the 3rd? My vote would be for lustre.org since that's the traditional location. On Nov 4, 2011, at 5:56 AM, Peter Jones wrote: Hi there I am pleased to announce that Lustre 1.8.7-wc1 has been declared GA and is available for download at http://downloads.whamcloud.com/public/lustre/lustre-1.8.7/ . Release Highlights -ext4 features enabled by default (LU419) -Several interop issues with 2.1 addressed (LU541/565/594) -Group quotas are now enforced (LU530) -Potential deadlock in mds_open addressed (LU146) Changelog details available at http://wiki.whamcloud.com/display/PUB/Changelog+1.8 Please log any issues found at http://bugs.whamcloud.com Regards Peter -- Peter Jones Whamcloud, Inc. www.whamcloud.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ssseager at gmail.com Fri Nov 4 20:17:32 2011 From: ssseager at gmail.com (Shay Seager) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 13:17:32 -0700 Subject: [Twg] SC11 - Speaker Schedule and Booth Information Message-ID: <907489E9-0C5E-493C-9400-25A69C8A575B@gmail.com> Hello All, OpenSFS and EOFS would like to invite you to come and experience everything Lustre with us. We have partnered with our member organizations to put on a great venue for you this year at SC11. Our booth is 4206 on the 6th level (aka - Lustre Community Pavilion). We are excited to present you with 3 fantastic days of speakers & demos. Check out our speaker schedule below and on our website http://www.opensfs.org/events-2 . While you are on our website, make sure you also check out information on LUG 2012 (http://www.opensfs.org/lug), registration is now open. We were also the only organization that received permission to celebrate during event hours, so please come for our Libations to Lustre Tuesday Nov, 15th from 4-6pm where we will serve you complementary local micro-brews and savory snacks - an occasion not to be missed! Booth 4206 is the place to be at SC11 (so feel free to forward this e-mail on, so you see your friends at Libations to Lustre). We look forward to seeing you at SC11! Lustre Community Pavillion Presents SC’11 Speaker Series HPC experts and Lustre Pioneers Tuesday, November 15, 2011 Peter Bojanic & Kevin Canady : 10:00 AM - "Lustre at Large" Nathan Rutman: 10:30AM - "Rock hard Lustre" Peter Jones: 11:00 AM - "Hands on Lustre" Galen Shipman and Stephane Thiell: 12:15-1:15pm - Birds of a Feather "Open Scalable File Systems, Transitioning from Petascale to Exoscale" Norman Morse & Hugo Falter : 1:00 PM - HPC Wire "Q&A for OpenSFS & EOFS" Liang Zhen: 2:00 PM - "Preliminary Results from the Single Server Metadata Performance for OpenSFS contract" Andreas Dilger : 3PM - "Lustre 2.x" OpenSFS Libations to Lustre : 4-6pm. Enjoy local frosty microbrews and satisfying savory snacks with HPC’s leading experts and your OpenSFS teammates. Wednesday - November 16, 2011 Eric Barton: 10AM - "Evolving Lustre for Exascale" John Spray: 11AM - "Whamcloud Lustre Management Tools" Brent Gorda, Norman Morse, Hugo Falter: 12:15-1:15PM - Birds of a Feather Session Ned Bass: 1pm - "The Lustre Monitoring Tool, LMT" Colin Faber: 2pm - "Lustre Technical Overview for Beginners" Stephane Thiell: 3pm - "Shine : an Open source Lustre management tool" Makia Minch: 4pm - "Lustre Simplified, ClusterStor Manger" Thursday - November 17, 2011 Colin Faber: 11AM - "Lustre Testing and Benchmarking" Pam Hamilton: 3pm - "Community Development Working Group and the Support Model" - - - Shay Seager Open SFS Secretary www.opensfs.org (925) 290-7641 shay at opensfs.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pjones at whamcloud.com Fri Nov 4 22:10:24 2011 From: pjones at whamcloud.com (Peter Jones) Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 15:10:24 -0700 Subject: [Twg] [wc-discuss] Lustre 1.8.7-wc1 released In-Reply-To: <73AED5C780AE05478241DB067651A9210237894C@XYUS-EX22.xyus.xyratex.com> References: <4EB3E10B.7080107@whamcloud.com> <73AED5C780AE05478241DB067651A9210237894C@XYUS-EX22.xyus.xyratex.com> Message-ID: <4EB462D0.2090006@whamcloud.com> Hi Nathan I agree that the proliferation of mailing lists is inefficient and I personally would love it if Oracle handed lustre.org over to OpenSFS. It rankles that the first hit anyone gets when they google "Lustre" is full of stale information ("LUG 2010 coming soon") and dead links (anyone clicking on anything download related is led on a wild goose chase) - hardly an fair reflection of a vibrant and active development community! However, at this time, lustre.org is still owned and hosted by Oracle and it unclear what the long term plans for it are and no guarantees that it will not suddenly wink out of existence (just as the ability to download Lustre releases from Oracle did over the summer). As such, I think that independent mailing lists are a sensible "safety net". OpenSFS and Whamcloud are distinct organizations and so naturally need their own mailing lists. Furthermore, Oracle is still producing its own Lustre 1.8.x releases and so we feel that promoting Whamcloud's 1.8.x releases on an Oracle-hosted mailing list would be inappropriate. If someone wants to forward these announcements to the lustre.org mailing list that is fine with us :-) I'll be happy to discuss this in more detail with you at SC11 if you like. Regards Peter On 11-11-04 12:13 PM, Nathan Rutman wrote: > Hi Peter - thanks. > Should these types of announcements also go out to > lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org > and discuss at lists.opensfs.org > ? > I hate the fact that there are now 3 lists where there used to be one > -- the fact of the matter is that all 3 lists are open, so it's really > not about control. Can we possibly just redirect all messages from two > of the lists to the 3rd? My vote would be for lustre.org > since that's the traditional location. > > > On Nov 4, 2011, at 5:56 AM, Peter Jones wrote: > >> Hi there >> >> I am pleased to announce that Lustre 1.8.7-wc1 has been declared GA >> and is available for download at >> http://downloads.whamcloud.com/public/lustre/lustre-1.8.7/. >> >> Release Highlights >> -ext4 features enabled by default (LU419) >> -Several interop issues with 2.1 addressed (LU541/565/594) >> -Group quotas are now enforced (LU530) >> -Potential deadlock in mds_open addressed (LU146) >> >> Changelog details available at >> *http://wiki.whamcloud.com/display/PUB/Changelog+1.8* >> >> Please log any issues found at http://bugs.whamcloud.com >> >> Regards >> >> Peter >> -- >> Peter Jones >> Whamcloud, Inc. >> www.whamcloud.com > -- Peter Jones Whamcloud, Inc. www.whamcloud.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carrier at cray.com Thu Nov 10 07:24:54 2011 From: carrier at cray.com (John Carrier) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 01:24:54 -0600 Subject: [Twg] TWG meeting 11/10/2011 Message-ID: Dave cannot make the meeting this week. Will hae a short call anyway to gather agenda items for our F2F meeting next week at SC11, where we have 2hrs on Monday 11/14 at the Sheraton Hotel's conference center. If you cannot attend Thursday's call, then please send agenda items to the reflector. Concall info: 9:30a PDT/12:30p EDT Dial-in numbers are 715-726-4994 Meeting ID and password are 72090 Thanks, --jc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carrier at cray.com Thu Nov 10 23:00:15 2011 From: carrier at cray.com (John Carrier) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:00:15 -0600 Subject: [Twg] TWG meeting minutes for 2011-11-10 Message-ID: Attached are the minutes from today's meeting. The proposed agenda for our F2F is * OpenSFS PAC update * OpenSFS Roadmap * 2012 Development Priorities Please send additional items to the discuss at lists.opensfs.org reflector. Meeting info OpenSFS TWG F2F Monday 11/14/2011, 1:30-3:30p PT Sheraton Seattle Hotel 1400 6th Avenue (near the WSCC) University Room - 4th Floor - Union Street Tower Dial-in : (715) 726-4994, ID/password 72090. Thanks, --jc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- OpenSFS Technical Working Group - RFP Review Meeting minutes : 11/10/2011 Concall: start : 9:30a PT, adjourn : 10:20a PT Next meeting: Face-to-face at SC11! Monday 11/14 1:30-3:30p PT Sheraton Seattle Hotel 1400 6th Avenue (near the WSCC) University Room - 4th Floor - Union Street Tower Attending Name Organization email ----------------- -------------- ---------------------------- John Carrier Cray carrier at cray.com Alex Kulyavtsev FNAL aik at fnal.gov Andreas Dilger Whamcloud adilger at whamcloud.com Nathan Rutman Xyratex nathan_rutman at xyratex.com Discussion The purpose of the meeting today was to discuss the agenda for the upcoming F2F meeting at SC11 on 11/14/11. We want to keep this meeting at a high level to address what the TWG needs to do in 2012. On today's call, we came up with the following topics for discussion at the F2F: OpenSFS PAC update The TWG prioritized requirements, issued an RFP, evaluated responses, and completed a SOW with Whamcloud. The PAC for the contract has been meeting weekly. The F2F is an opportunity for the PAC to update the rest of the TWG on the status of the program. OpenSFS Roadmap This topic started mostly as a question: what is the OpenSFS roadmap? The roadmap is the TWG's responsibility. Although we have contributed by guiding OpenSFS funding of new features, OpenSFS doesn't have a roadmap of its own. Currently we depend on roadmaps from Whamcloud and Xyratex. Should OpenSFS take a broader view that integrates contributions from these vendors as well as others? 2012 Development Priorities The TWG generated a list of priorities last year that we used to drive the RFP. We need to update the list in 2012 and determine what other features we should try to drive. We also need to be open to unsolicited proposals such as IU's WAN project as well as considering features that could lay the groundwork for moving Lustre toward the exascale. The F2F is an opportunity to kick start discussion of new requirements and development priorities. Other topics covered during the meeting: * The PAC needs to get approved documents from the project released to the OpenSFS website. We need a better organization of materials than is currently available on the OpenSFS website. * There will be an exascale discussion at the open file systems BOF during SC (Tues 11/15, 12:15-1:15, TCC 301/302) * We need to encourage non-OpenSFS members to contribute during our next requirements gathering effort. We also need to get companies like Fujitsu, who are clearly working on Lustre, to join OpenSFS -- or at least, contribute their code back to the community. * Alex asked about the OpenSFS repository we described last year for 3rd party tools. Nathan said there is already a contrib branch in the source rpms. Andreas said that WC maintains the following links too: Wiki page: http://wiki.whamcloud.com/display/PUB/Third+Party+Tools In the Lustre Git repo: http://git.whamcloud.com/?p=fs/lustre-release.git;a=tree;f=lustre/contrib * We also discussed the numerous Lustre mailing lists. Oracle still maintains lustre.org, but lists are being hosted elsewhere as well (whamcloud.com, opensfs.org). Do we really need all of them? We can discuss this during the F2F. call ended @ 10:20a From carrier at cray.com Thu Nov 17 12:42:43 2011 From: carrier at cray.com (John Carrier) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 06:42:43 -0600 Subject: [Twg] TWG meeting minutes for 2011-11-14 Message-ID: Thanks to all who attended the F2F meeting at SC11 this week. (We had a phone line open, but didn't hear anyone join the call.) My minutes from the meeting are attached. Please send additions or corrections to the reflectors. As discussed at the F2F, there will NOT be a concall this week or next. Attendees at the F2F, in fact, stated their preference to hold concalls only when needed to resolve discussions from the reflectors. Please keep the meeting time in your calendars as a placeholder. If concalls are needed, we will use the Thursday, 9:30am PT slot. >From the F2F we have some new topics to cover in the next few months: 1) Define the statement of work for IU's WAN project. John and Dave will work with Simms to get a draft together. After TWG review, we will present the SOW to the Board. Please let us know if you are interested in participating in the project advisory committee (PAC) for this project. 2) Update our list of requirements for 2012. Please see the list we created last year (http://goo.gl/cZSWG). This list will drive new development programs and requests for proposals in the spring. Our next chance for a F2F meeting will be at LUG this April in Austin. Thanks, --jc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- OpenSFS Technical Working Group - F2F @ SC11 Meeting minutes : 11/14/2011 Meeting started 1:40p PT, adjourn : 3:30p PT Next meeting: TBD Attending Name Organization email ----------------- -------------- ---------------------------- Cory Spitz Cray spitzcor at cray.com John Carrier Cray carrier at cray.com Steve Simms IU ssimms at indiana.edu Chris Morrone LLNL morrone2 at llnl.gov Brian Behlendorf LLNL behlendorf at llnl.gov Norm Morse OpenSFS normanrmorse at gmail.com Evan Felix PNNL e at pnnl.gov Dave Dillow ORNL dillowda at ornl.gov Galen Shipman ORNL gshipman at ornl.gov Eric Barton Whamcloud eeb at whamcloud.com Andreas Dilger Whamcloud adilger at whamcloud.com Oleg Drokin Whamcloud green at whamcloud. com Peter Jones Whamcloud pjones at whamcloud.com Bryon Neitzel Whamcloud bryon at whamcloud.com Jon Nicholson WTSI jjn at songer.ac.uk Peter Clapham WTSI pc7 at sanger.ac.uk Guy Coates WTSI gmyc at sanger.ac.uk Joe Mervini SNL jamervi at sandia.gov Nathan Rutman Xyratex nathan_rutman at xyratex.com Agenda (see OpenSFS_TWG_SC11_final.pdf on the reflector) * TWG Overview/Status * OpenSFS PAC update * OpenSFS Roadmap * 2012 Development Priorities TWG Overview/Status -------- TWG made significant progress last year that has significantly contributed to the stability of Lustre in the marketplace. PAC Update -------- Dave presented an overview and progress update of the current development with Whamcloud. All features have the following milestones: - Scope Statement - Solution Architecture - High Level Design - Implementation - Demonstration - Delivery [See slides for status of the SMP affinity, DNE, lfsck projects] The PAC has been posting completed milestone documents to the reflector. We discussed the need to post this information to the TWG website or wiki to make it easier for members outside the PAC to track project progress. Roadmaps -------- [This was a fairly lively discussion. We jumped around a bit. Below are my attempts to summarize the main points. Please send corrections or additions to the reflector. jc] Contributions : Using Whamcloud's posted roadmap, John showed that the features landing through 2.4 are all community contributions. We next need to see what contributions from other vendors are in progress that we can place on this chart. Eric said that Whamcloud is being very protective about what could land because of their concerns for stability. Their defensiveness should not be construed as competitive self-interest. Instead, they know that there are many features in the works, but they don't show up on the roadmap unless there is an actual scope or effort estimate associated with the feature. For example, NRS is in progress, but is waiting testing on large scale resource. Someone asked if it could be included in the code without being turned on to make testing of the feature easier. Andreas said this was the way size on MDS was supposed to be evaluated. SOM was there, but not really tested. NRS is definitely in the datapath, but review cycles have been long. OpenSFS needs to provide a mechanism for collecting information from contributors. We need to follow the pattern Whamcloud/OpenSFS are using with the PAC to define milestones, which should be completed overtime, not when the implementation is done. Recall, Whamcloud asked a year ago that new code be delivered in small, easily inspected chunks. We agreed that this is where a wiki and a submission template could help. It would help contributors formulate their submissions, generate a delivery caldendar, and provide a target for unit test results. Items to track on the wiki for each submission are : exec summary, sponsor, size, expected completion dates, risk, stability ranking, documentation, test results. Whamcloud already has something similar in place. Eric said Bryon can help organize. Future releases : We came back to the issue of how to track what new features have been proposed. The Whamcloud "community roadmap" only reflects those features with resources estimated and assigned. Whamcloud has a parallel list of features not yet committed. OpenSFS needs to extend that to include features being developed by other contributors. Eric noted that for a 2.2 release in March, we would need a freeze in December. 2.3 would then be frozen in June. Andreas(?) suggested that we ask contributors of new features beyond the 2.3 release to present their proposals at LUG. Test hardware : We discussed what resources are available for testing. For example, NSF is sponsoring Probe--could that be used? Storage would be local to the cluster node. Andreas said that experience at Sun was that the 90day burn-in period was not sufficient. It is clear that we need more test equipment. The blocker for OpenSFS is that our contractor (Whamcloud) has foreign nationals that need access. This puts resources like Hyperion out of reach. ORNL or IU can host donated equipment. We need storage and client clusters. John to investigate whether Cray can donate a cabinet of XT to provide 96 client nodes. IU and ORNL have the experience with Cray to operate the system at their sites. Dave noted that the contract with OpenSFS requested 4 MDSs and 4 OSSs for testing of DNE. So we still need servers and storage. Conference calls : The preference is to continue to have discussions on email as much as possible. Everyone agreed that the call should only be used when email to the reflectors are insufficient. Past meetings for the discussion of NRS were sited as an example of the value of the calls. Otherwise, the consensus was that the calls should only be organized when needed. TWG members should keep the spot open on their calendars, but we don't need the weekly meeting unless the co-chairs call the meeting. Mailing lists : We currently have multiple "discuss" lists. Why? Whamcloud started theirs after noting some posts to lustre.org were getting delayed. lustre.org, however, is still operating. We agreed that twg at lists.opensfs.org and discuss at lists.opensfs.org should still be used. The lustre.org email reflectors serve a purpose since they domain is well known. lustre-discuss will be difficult to transition but lustre-devel is such a small community that someone just needs to say the discussion has moved to lustre-devel at lists.opensfs.org and it would. [Andreas has already started including the opensfs.org list in his replies to lustre.org email.] Chris suggested that we create the site lustre.opensfs.org to reference opensfs.org. We could give this high google search rankings if all OpenSFS members put a link on their websites to it. [note: lustre.opensfs.org does not exist] 2012 development priorities -------- We discussed the need to update our list of community requirements, which we started at SC10 (http://goo.gl/cZSWG) and submitted to the OpenSFS to recommend the current metadata projects. We will start discussions on the TWG reflectors, but need to encourage non-members (eg, EOFS) to include their suggestions as we did last year. TWG members should start the discussion on the email reflectors. We can hold concalls after the first of the year, as needed, to organize the information. Please review last year's list and make new suggestions to the OpenSFS email lists. OpenSFS has money available for new development in 2012. When the new list is complete, we will need to submit our recommendations to the Board. Norm said that OpenSFS is a private corporation and does not have to follow the formal government procurement procedures as we did in 2011. This leaves us open to consider issuing a call for proposals as well as issuing a formal RFP. This could encourage smaller programs, such as IU's WAN proposal, to come forward. The important point is to get the discussion of requirements started again on the reflectors. We should be looking at short and long range projects, which can include foundational features to prepare Lustre for exascale. Other topics : IU's WAN project : The Board approved IU's WAN proposal. The TWG needs to develop the statement of work (SOW) for the Board. At the end of the meeting, as people were leaving, Dave and John talked to Simms about getting a first draft started before the first of the year. As part of the SOW, we expect the Board to assign a technical representative to oversee the project on behalf of OpenSFS and to create a project advisory committee (PAC) from the TWG membership to assist this person. This is the same process we are using for the Whamcloud development project. Discussion of the SOW will be kept inside OpenSFS on the twg at lists.opensfs.org reflector only. Meeting adjourned at 3:30 PT From pjones at whamcloud.com Thu Nov 17 13:49:34 2011 From: pjones at whamcloud.com (Peter Jones) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 05:49:34 -0800 Subject: [Twg] TWG meeting minutes for 2011-11-14 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4EC510EE.3040708@whamcloud.com> John I think that this only half captures the point Andreas was making. His point was that using technology previews can work well if the preview proves that the development is suitable for broader usage, but in cases like SOM where this has not been so it can cause headaches because you need to consider how to deal with those using the deprecated version of the feature when creating the revised version. Andreas Please correct me if I have mis-stated your position Regards Peter On 11-11-17 4:42 AM, John Carrier wrote: > > Thanks to all who attended the F2F meeting at SC11 this week. (We had > a phone line open, but didn't hear anyone join the call.) My minutes > from the meeting are attached. Please send additions or corrections > to the reflectors. > > As discussed at the F2F, there will NOT be a concall this week or > next. Attendees at the F2F, in fact, stated their preference to hold > concalls only when needed to resolve discussions from the > reflectors. Please keep the meeting time in your calendars as a > placeholder. If concalls are needed, we will use the Thursday, 9:30am > PT slot. > > From the F2F we have some new topics to cover in the next few months: > > 1)Define the statement of work for IU's WAN project. John and Dave > will work with Simms to get a draft together. After TWG review, we > will present the SOW to the Board. Please let us know if you are > interested in participating in the project advisory committee (PAC) > for this project. > > 2)Update our list of requirements for 2012. Please see the list we > created last year (http://goo.gl/cZSWG). This list will drive new > development programs and requests for proposals in the spring. > > Our next chance for a F2F meeting will be at LUG this April in Austin. > > Thanks, > > --jc > > > > _______________________________________________ > twg mailing list > twg at lists.opensfs.org > http://lists.opensfs.org/listinfo.cgi/twg-opensfs.org -- Peter Jones Whamcloud, Inc. www.whamcloud.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Nathan_Rutman at xyratex.com Fri Nov 18 21:39:23 2011 From: Nathan_Rutman at xyratex.com (Nathan Rutman) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 13:39:23 -0800 Subject: [Twg] WC and FEFS Message-ID: <73AED5C780AE05478241DB067651A92102378996@XYUS-EX22.xyus.xyratex.com> http://www.japancorp.net/press_release/24453/whamcloud_and_fujitsu_to_collaborate_on_lustre_development Does this mean we're going to get Fujitsu's FEFS patches incorporated into the trunk? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From adilger at whamcloud.com Fri Nov 18 22:25:30 2011 From: adilger at whamcloud.com (Andreas Dilger) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:25:30 -0700 Subject: [Twg] WC and FEFS In-Reply-To: <73AED5C780AE05478241DB067651A92102378996@XYUS-EX22.xyus.xyratex.com> References: <73AED5C780AE05478241DB067651A92102378996@XYUS-EX22.xyus.xyratex.com> Message-ID: <87B3647E-3FF4-40E9-B924-1A9A16BB1452@whamcloud.com> On 2011-11-18, at 2:39 PM, Nathan Rutman wrote: > http://www.japancorp.net/press_release/24453/whamcloud_and_fujitsu_to_collaborate_on_lustre_development > > Does this mean we're going to get Fujitsu's FEFS patches incorporated into the trunk? We definitely hope so. As yet we haven't seen anything more than the presentations at LUG and SC (the one just after mine), so I don't know what all of the changes are, nor how easy/hard they will be to integrate. Some of the major improvements previously discussed include: - fair share: an NRS-like bandwidth management enhancement. Not sure if it is per UID or per job, and whether it has both min and max bandwidth tunables, nor who/how it is managed - 10000 OSTs: a number of fixes and optimizations to reduce memory usage and the size of RPCs when not needed - ping throttle: disable client->server pings, and use something IR-like to notify clients when a server is down, and a notify servers when a client is down using some external health network - SPARC arch: big endian support for server and clients, large PAGE_SIZE on the server - ext4 fixes: large block size (on SPARC servers) - max ACLs: increased max ACL count to 8192 (via larger xattrs, I guess) Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Principal Engineer Whamcloud, Inc.