[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#273713: Lustre packaging



Hi Goswin,

On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 03:34:40PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> >
> >> The 2.6.16 code I have works for light use: survives some tests such as 
> >> bonnie, etc. 
> >> but hangs in large workloads: I'm debugging this, but would prefer to 
> >> target 2.6.17 for Etch. 
> >> (even if we don't get in the Etch release, I'd like to support the 
> >> stable kernel.) Some patches 
> >> ported to 2.6.17.
> >
> > Out of curiousity what sort of heavy workloads are you trying out on the
> > system?
> >
> > I'd be interested in testing the package out on a small test cluster
> > here as well for users who have heavy IO needs.
> 
> We usualy do a burn-in test that continiously copies a linux source
> tree to a new dir and compares it. And that with a few clients.
> 
> Also some benchmarks like bonnie with 1-x clients to see how it
> scales.
> 
> > also is there any interest in testing these patches for 2.6.16/17 with
> > with the openib patches/stacks?
> 
> For that I'm waiting for 2.6.18. I'm assuming you mean the openib2
> driver in the vanilla kernel and not the (extra) melanox drivers. With
> 2.6.15 we patch in the melanox drivers.
> 

I guess i didnt phrase my initial mail too well, but yes openib2 in the
vanilla kernel + lustre it is something I would like to test. though we havent
sucessfully gotten openib2 to work correctly on our compute systems so
we havent looked at lustre + openib2 yet.

i guess we should look at getting openib2 working correctly at our site
before i post more to this list in relation to openib2+lustre.


Thanks,
Jimmy. 

-- 
Jimmy Tang
Trinity Centre for High Performance Computing,
Lloyd Building, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland.
http://www.tchpc.tcd.ie/



Reply to: