[Twg] TWG meeting minutes for 2012-03-01

John Carrier carrier at cray.com
Thu Mar 8 14:32:01 UTC 2012


Attached are the meeting minutes from last week's TWG call.  We spent this meeting introducing features that the TWG should consider as we update our requirements and roadmaps document.

We will continue this discussion this week (3/8).
Dial: 1-715-726-4994,  1-866-304-8294
ID & Password: 72090

Please post corrections/questions/comments to discuss at lists.opensfs.org<mailto:discuss at lists.opensfs.org>

My apologies for getting these out so late.

--jc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensfs.org/pipermail/twg_lists.opensfs.org/attachments/20120308/f4d43b2a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
OpenSFS Technical Working Group
Meeting minutes : 2012-03-01

Concall: start : 9:30a PT, adjourn : 10:44a PT

Next meeting: Thursday, 03/08/2011 @ 9:30a PDT/12:30p EDT
   Dial-in numbers are 1-715-726-4994 or 1-866-304-8294
   Meeting ID and password are 72090

Attending : 
   Name                 Organization   email
   -----------------    -------------- ----------------------------
   Diego Moreno         Bull           Diego.Moreno-Lazaro at bull.net
   Cory Spitz           Cray           spitzcor at cray.com
   John Carrier         Cray           carrier at cray.com
   Alex Kulyavtsev      FNAL           aik at fnal.gov
   Gene Oleynik         FNAL           oleynik at fnal.gov
   Joshua Walgenbach    IU             jjw at indiana.edu
   Chris Morrone        LLNL           morrone2 at llnl.gov
   Norm Morse           OpenSFS        normanrmorse at gmail.com
   Shay Seager          OpenSFS        shay at opensfs.org
   Dave Dillow          ORNL           dillowda at ornl.gov
   Andreas Dilger       Whamcloud      adilger at whamcloud.com

Agenda
      - Requirements & Roadmap
        * update community requirements
        * identify features in need of development
        * funneling projects outside OpenSFS into CDWG

We started discussing the list of requirements the TWG gathered a year
ago (http://goo.gl/cZSWG) [The topic list is copied at the end of these
minutes].  We quickly focused on the new items below.

= single client performance improvements
   DaveD said that single client gets CPU bound which limits bandwidth
      to 500 MB/s.
   AndreasD said the new multi-thread RPC code, which has been funded by
      ORNL and LLNL, improves single threaded reader/writer performance.
      The new code should land in Lustre 2.2. 
   ChrisM said Livermore is seeing 2x improvements with  the new code
      (1000 MB/s using 8 threads).  The CPU is not limited and the
      bottleneck beyond GB/s is elsewhere.
   ORNL's point is still valid: there is a bottleneck limiting single
      client performance.  Though CPU affinity for the MDS may propagate
      to the clients, the client needs to improve SMP scalability and
      efficiency. 

= improved MDS rates
   JohnC asked if the debug feature Whamcloud uses to increase the MDS
      rate for testing could be used to improve performance by
      increasing the number of MDS RPCs in flight.
   Andreas said the debug symbol he mentioned last week is useful for
      testing but breaks recovery. Nonetheless, there is a need to
      increase the number of file-modifying RPCs in flight for DNE,
      which will must support multiple threads on a single client and
      many RPCs in flight from one MDS to another.  This feature will
      appear as a debug patch in 2.2.  If testing with the patch works,
      then there is work to deliver the feature to the client.
      

= online data migration
   Andreas suggested that this feature was needed to empty OSTs,
      rebalance space between OSTs and to rebalance between OST pools.
      The first phase is tied to the HSM since a migration tool would
      need layout locks, a policy engine and the IOCTL to tell MDS to
      change the layout and flush the client cache.  
   Apparently, the layout locks in the current implementation of the
      HSM are sufficient for quiescent files, but not for active files.
      Hence, online data migration will require fixing layout locks in
      the HSM first.
   DiegoM said that the HSM is fully operational, but not robust. He
      said Bull seems to be the only one interested in testing and the
      code needs more groups using it to make progress.  OpenSFS could
      ask CEA how OpenSFS could help. 
   AlexK said FNAL was very interested in data migration.  He is
      interested in inactive files.  Andreas said lfs_migrate already
      does this and would need a layout lock patch.  The problem is that
      the script is active all the time and today has a performance
      impact.
   Fixing the layout locks is a first step to migration, replication,
      and other enterprise features.  For example, a policy manager
      could move copies to other sites after the I/O quiesces using a
      similar mechanism to migration.  
   John asked if the layout locks and migration could be used for
      snapshots.  Andreas thought this needs to be supported in the
      backend file system.  ldiskfs can't do it, but ZFS can.  ChrisM
      said LLNL is not yet looking at this ZFS feature in their work.

= improved security
   Alex said his site needs kerberos and x509.  The open science grid
      needs x509 for data transfers.  
   JoshW described the work IU plans to do to improve security for the
      LustreWAN project.  He agreed to talk to Alex on how x509 could be
      done within the new infrastructure.

= dynamic LNET configuration
   Andreas introduced the idea of providing dynamic LNET configuration
      so that changes to the LNET configuration would not require
      stopping the file system for the changes to be propagated.  The
      group enthusiastically supported any attempt to remove LNET's
      current dependence on modprobe.  
   The configuration also has to allow flexibility in some of the LNET
      parameters. Cory mentioned that tuning peer credites on o2iblnd
      has to agree across all LNET tiers.  He has found that the only
      way to fix the mismatch is to shutdown all clusters.
   ORNL currently uses scripts to modify lNET configuration by hand.
      Dave said he thinks this effort would have to fix ptlrpc to remove
      stale entries.  He thinks this is a long-term solution, but it
      wouldn't really help him at ORNL.
   Andreas said the effort for dynamic LNET config isn't gigantic, but
      it would touch lots of code (LNET, ptlrpc)

At this point, we had run over our scheduled meeting time. The following
items were presented without much discussion:

   = IPv6
      This item was on our list last year.  Andreas said adding support
      for IPv6 will change the network protocol so the impact is more
      involved than just changing internal data structures.  He
      suggested a phased approach that could make the feature available
      in the code base, but would not be used until a site upgraded to
      IPv6.  Andreas said the lack of IPv6 will hit WAN users first.

   = Network Request Scheduler (NRS)
      The core infrastructure of NRS has been prototyped and Xyratex has
      done some work recently.  What is needed to complete the project
      and have it land in the canonical tree?
   
   = complex file layouts
      Andreas suggested adding support to allow different file layouts
      for different file types (eg HDF5).  A simple example would let a
      file start with one stripe definition then move to different
      striping after the file grew.

Dave ended the meeting by asking the TWG to consider projects that
affected Lustre's long term roadmap.  Should OpenSFS fund research
projects? 


-------------------------
OpenSFS Requirements (3/22/2011)

   * Performance Requirements
     - Metadata server performance [FUNDED]
     - Metadata server scalability [FUNDED]
     - Single file performance
     - Quality of service
     - Locality and scalability
     - LNET channel bonding
   * Foundational Requirements
     - Support for alternate backend file systems [FUNDED]
     - Backend storage investigation
     - Scalable fault management
   * Manageability and Administrative Requirements
     - Better support for newer kernels
     - Improved configuration of Lustre
     - Allowing for controlled partial-system maintenance
     - Balancing storage use
     - Adaptive storage layout
     - Arbitrary OST assignment
     - Better userspace tools
     - File system consistency checks [FUNDED]
     - Snapshots
     - User Identity Mapping [FUNDED]
   * Application Interface Requirements
     - Improved storage semantics/interfaces
     - Better user tool API
   * Other Requirements
     - Varying page-sizes
     - Mixed endian support
     - IPv6


         
      
   
      

     

       
            
      
         



More information about the Twg mailing list