[Twg] [Discuss] DDN requirements

Wed May 30 00:28:55 UTC 2012

Yes, I think that internals documentation would be excellent.

FYI, there will be some OSD API documentation that results from LLNL's 
OSD contract work.

Chris

On 05/29/2012 05:07 PM, Ian Colle wrote:
> I think LLNL would also appreciate making #1 a priority.
>
> Chris Morrone – can you confirm?
>
>
> Ian R. Colle
> HPC Project Manager, Whamcloud
> Cell: +1.303.601.7713
> Email: ian at whamcloud.com<mailto:ian at whamcloud.com>
>
> [http://images.wisestamp.com/apps/buttons/linkedinbutton_option_3.png]<http://www.linkedin.com/in/ircolle>
> [http://twitter-badges.s3.amazonaws.com/follow_me-a.png]<http://www.twitter.com/ircolle>
>
> From: Nathan Rutman<Nathan_Rutman at xyratex.com<mailto:Nathan_Rutman at xyratex.com>>
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 16:54:46 -0700
> To: John Carrier<carrier at cray.com<mailto:carrier at cray.com>>
> Cc:<discuss at lists.opensfs.org<mailto:discuss at lists.opensfs.org>>,<twg at lists.opensfs.org<mailto:twg at lists.opensfs.org>>
> Subject: Re: [Discuss] DDN requirements
>
>
> On May 29, 2012, at 9:23 AM, John Carrier wrote:
>
> I received this list from DDN over the weekend.   I note that the first two items on their list were not captured during our requirements gathering this spring.   I think we should add them to our requirements document, but we need to discuss how they impact our recommendations to the OpenSFS Board.
>
> I have added these to the spreadsheet and taken the liberty of matching “patch-less server support” with our existing “better support for newer kernels”.
>
> --jc
>
> DDN's Lustre requirements for OpenSFS TWG
>
> 1)  Architecture/Developer documentation
>         Well documented internals of MDS, MGS, OSS, OST, OSD API, etc.
>
> Interestingly, this first item is not on anyone else's list, however I also think it is important for the dissemination of Lustre knowledge and to help grow the Lustre contributor community.  I also believe Oak Ridge feels strongly about this, as the producers of the first Lustre Internals doc.  I think an expansion and update of this is worthy of funding consideration.
>
>
>
> 2) Improved small and medium I/O performance (compare to GPFS)
> 3) Single client performance while preserving scalability   (even at a single thread per client)
> 4) OST migration/rebalancing  (compare to GPFS)
> 5) LNET channel bonding
> 6) Patch-less server support
> 7) Single MDS File create performance
> 8) Single MDS Directory traversal and attribute retrieval performance
> 9) Improved Lustre tests and testing infrastructure
> 10) Quality of service (mechanism and policies)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.opensfs.org<mailto:discuss at lists.opensfs.org>
> http://lists.opensfs.org/listinfo.cgi/discuss-opensfs.org
>
> _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss at lists.opensfs.org<mailto:discuss at lists.opensfs.org>http://lists.opensfs.org/listinfo.cgi/discuss-opensfs.org
>