[Beowulf] shared compute/storage WAS: Re: Lustre Upgrades

[John Hearns]

For VM substitute 'container' - since containerisation is intimately linked
with cgroups anyway.
Google 'CEPH Docker' and there is plenty of information.

Someone I work with tried out CEPH on Dockerr the other day, and got into
some knots regarding access to the actual hardware devices.
He then downloaded Minio and got it working very rapidly. Sorry - I am only
repeating this story second hand.









On Thu, 26 Jul 2018 at 15:20, Michael Di Domenico <mdidomenico4 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 3:14 AM, Jörg Saßmannshausen
> <sassy-work at sassy.formativ.net> wrote:
> > I once had this idea as well: using the spinning discs which I have in
> the
> > compute nodes as part of a distributed scratch space. I was using
> glusterfs
> > for that as I thought it might be a good idea. It was not.
>
> i split the thread as to not pollute the other discussion.
>
> I'm curious if anyone has any hard data on the above, but
> encapsulating the compute from the storage using VM's instead of just
> separate processes?
>
> in theory you could cap the performance interference using VM's and
> cgroup controls, but i'm not sure how effective that actually is (no
> data) in HPC.
>
> I've been thinking about this recently to rebalance some of the rack
> loading throughout my data center.   yes, i can move things around
> within the racks, but then it turns into a cabling nightmare.
>
> discuss?
> _______________________________________________
> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing
> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit
> http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.beowulf.org/pipermail/beowulf/attachments/20180726/9b4c9c45/attachment.html>