We have a setup that requires a lot of tar being used on lustre. We see a drop in tar performance when going to the lustre setup. I have searched and found the lustre tar 1.19. Unfortunate this did not provide any improvement in the tar times. Are there any suggestions for improving tar with lustre. tar to extract a 5.2GB file on to the lustre system - 3m22s tar to extract the same 5.2GB file on to local disk - 1m06s tat to create a 5.2GB tar file on the lustre system - 4m10s tar to create the same 5.2GB file on to local disk - 2m21s Environment Lustre 1.8.4 4 - OSS servers 2- 2.5TB OST''s per OSS 10Gbe Network Thank you Rocky -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-discuss/attachments/20120213/9b20f60c/attachment.html
> We have a setup that requires a lot of tar being used on > lustre.That''s your choice, however audacious it may be. [ ... ]> tar to extract a 5.2GB file on to the lustre system - 3m22s > tar to extract the same 5.2GB file on to local disk - 1m06s> tat to create a 5.2GB tar file on the lustre system - 4m10s > tar to create the same 5.2GB file on to local disk - 2m21sThis depends a lot on what is inside the ''tar'' file (and the settings for the local file system), which do not seem important to you, but really matter. But in general this is not surprising. It is a FAQ: MDS updates involve latency. As its structure with a number of object/strip servers and many file clients suggests, Lustre is meant to do well on parallel workloads reading/writing large files. That involves tradeoffs. [ ... ]