Need comments about cluster file systems
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Donald Becker becker at scyld.comThu Nov 14 13:06:57 PST 2002
- Previous message: Need comments about cluster file systems
- Next message: Need comments about cluster file systems
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 hanzl at noel.feld.cvut.cz wrote: > > In other words, local disks seems to be sufficient in the beowulf world, > > What surprises me is that I haven't heard of any cluster using local > disks as persistent cache for files loaded from some central > repository That's a very common scenario, and many deployed systems do exactly that. > using something like Coda or InterMezzo (for systems where > local disks are quicker than network card). Ahhh, you are looking for a Named Subsystem that claims to be a Cluster File System. The key to good performance is not exceeding the semantic requirements of the application by too much, and the best systems are so transparent to the end user that they don't Need A Capitalized Name. Our cluster system, for example, uses a specialized whole-file-caching filesystem internally. End users don't see it as a file system, but that's what it is. We take advantage of the semantics of executable and libraries to get better performance and caching behavior than using a general purpose file system. It's "pluggable" so we can transparently use customized file transport modes (TCP, multicast, direct Myri or SCI, even FTP!), or directly use another network file systems. The special semantics are that executables and libraries are only replaced with new versions, never updated in place or extended. A new versions is a new file, and the running applications continue to use the old verison. > (For sure others will point you to PVFS, which IMHO makes sense only > if network card is quicker than local disk.) It's frustrating to hear people talk about how wonderful InterMezzo and Lustre _are_, and dismiss PVFS and GFS. Software that is not quite finished is always better and faster than software that already exists. It only loses speed and features when reality looms. Talk about vaporware and deployed systems in different categories unless you clearly use the future tense. -- Donald Becker becker at scyld.com Scyld Computing Corporation http://www.scyld.com 410 Severn Ave. Suite 210 Scyld Beowulf cluster system Annapolis MD 21403 410-990-9993
- Previous message: Need comments about cluster file systems
- Next message: Need comments about cluster file systems
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
