<div class="socmaildefaultfont" dir="ltr" style="font-family:Arial;font-size:10.5pt" ><div dir="ltr" >Flash F9000 is officially tested and tested by me in a production environment and this work fine</div>
<div dir="ltr" > </div>
<div dir="ltr" > </div>
<div dir="ltr" >Does IBM Spectrum Scale support 4K disk sectors?<br>A4.11:<br>Yes, 4K disk sector support requires IBM Spectrum Scale V4.1.0.5 or later. The following disk<br>subsystems with 4K sector size have been tested by IBM:<br>ECKD disk devices (Linux for z Systems only)<br>IBM FlashSystem 820.<br>IBM FlashSystem 840<br>IBM FlashSystem 900<br>Notes:<br>Other disk devices may work with IBM Spectrum Scale, though they have not been tested by<br>IBM. See the question What disk hardware has IBM Spectrum Scale been tested with?<br>1.<br>IBM Spectrum Scale 2. on Windows does not support 4K disk sectors.</div>
<div dir="ltr" > </div>
<div dir="ltr" > </div>
<div dir="ltr" > </div>
<div dir="ltr" > </div>
<div dir="ltr" >This is " IBM Spectrum Scale™ Frequently Asked Questions and Answers " on the knowledge center.</div>
<div dir="ltr" > </div>
<div dir="ltr" > </div>
<div dir="ltr" > </div>
<div class="socmaildefaultfont" dir="ltr" style="font-family:Arial;font-size:10.5pt" ><div dir="ltr" style="margin-top: 20px;" ><div style="font-size: 12pt; font-weight: bold; font-family: sans-serif; color: #7C7C5F;" ><table height="278" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="372" > <tbody> <tr valign="top" > <td valign="middle" width="284" ><b><font face="Arial" size="3" >Danny Alexander Calderon Rodriguez</font></b></td> </tr> <tr valign="top" > <td valign="middle" width="284" ><b><font face="Arial" size="3" >Client Technical Specialist - CTS</font></b><br> <b><font face="Arial" size="3" >Storage</font></b><br> <b><font face="Arial" size="3" >STG Colombia</font></b><br> <br> <font face="Arial" color="#696969" size="3" >Phone: 57-1-</font><font face="Arial" color="#5F5F5F" size="3" >6281956</font></td> </tr> <tr valign="top" > <td width="284" ><font face="Arial" color="#696969" size="3" >Mobile: 57- 318 352 9258</font><br> <br> <font face="Arial" color="#696969" size="3" >Carrera 53 Número 100-25</font></td> </tr> <tr valign="top" > <td width="284" ><font face="Arial" color="#696969" size="3" > Bogotá, Colombia</font></td> </tr> <tr valign="top" > <td width="284" ><font face="Arial" color="#696969" size="3" > </font><img src="cid:14634403158690" height="30" width="83" ></td> </tr> </tbody></table></div>
<div style="font-size: 8pt; font-family: sans-serif; margin-top: 10px;" ><div> </div></div></div></div>
<div dir="ltr" > </div>
<div dir="ltr" > </div>
<blockquote data-history-content-modified="1" dir="ltr" style="border-left:solid #aaaaaa 2px; margin-left:5px; padding-left:5px; direction:ltr; margin-right:0px" >----- Original message -----<br>From: gpfsug-discuss-request@spectrumscale.org<br>Sent by: gpfsug-discuss-bounces@spectrumscale.org<br>To: gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org<br>Cc:<br>Subject: gpfsug-discuss Digest, Vol 52, Issue 20<br>Date: Mon, May 16, 2016 4:48 AM<br>
<div><font face="Default Monospace,Courier New,Courier,monospace" size="2" >Send gpfsug-discuss mailing list submissions to<br>gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org<br><br>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br><a href="http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss" target="_blank" >http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss</a><br>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>gpfsug-discuss-request@spectrumscale.org<br><br>You can reach the person managing the list at<br>gpfsug-discuss-owner@spectrumscale.org<br><br>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>than "Re: Contents of gpfsug-discuss digest..."<br><br><br>Today's Topics:<br><br> 1. Flash for metadata<br> (Simon Thompson (Research Computing - IT Services))<br> 2. Re: Flash for metadata (Sanchez, Paul)<br> 3. Re: Flash for metadata<br> (Simon Thompson (Research Computing - IT Services))<br><br><br>----------------------------------------------------------------------<br><br>Message: 1<br>Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 08:44:05 +0000<br>From: "Simon Thompson (Research Computing - IT Services)"<br><S.J.Thompson@bham.ac.uk><br>To: "gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org"<br><gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org><br>Subject: [gpfsug-discuss] Flash for metadata<br>Message-ID:<br><CF45EE16DEF2FE4B9AA7FF2B6EE26545F577FBC6@EX13.adf.bham.ac.uk><br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br><br>Hi all<br><br>I'm currently about to deploy some flash systems (FS-900) to take our metadata for one of our Spectrum Scale file-systems. We use 4k inodes for this file-system.<br><br>On the FS-900, when creating a volume, we get a choice of 512b or 4k sectors. Does anyone have a suggestion on this? On a spinning disk RAID array, I get what a strip size is and we'd use multiples of the stripe where possible for the block size.<br><br>Is the sector size on the FS-900 the smallest chunk that can be written out? And so would it make sense to use 4k sectors for 4k GPFS inodes right?<br><br>Related. In the deployment guide for the FS-900 arrays, if one is using a file-system (e.g. XFS) on the array the guide talks about aligning the partitions with with array, when GPFS is used on a storage array, does it automatically work out the sector alignment?<br><br><br>Thanks<br><br>Simon<br>-------------- next part --------------<br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>URL: <<a href="http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss/attachments/20160516/2909e86d/attachment-0001.html" target="_blank" >http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss/attachments/20160516/2909e86d/attachment-0001.html</a>><br><br>------------------------------<br><br>Message: 2<br>Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 09:28:35 +0000<br>From: "Sanchez, Paul" <Paul.Sanchez@deshaw.com><br>To: "gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org"<br><gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org><br>Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Flash for metadata<br>Message-ID:<br><49a3ab3b493a49e59177c6c25dd34d23@mbxtoa1.winmail.deshaw.com><br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br><br>Simon,<br><br>I can't speak specifically to the FS-900, since I generally use Dell Compellent and NetApp EF arrays for flash today. But I also take care to ensure that the system pool metadata NSDs use RAID10 (or equivalent) rather than RAID5/6. For small 4K metadata writes, on a 4K blocksize LUN this could result in optimal writes. For larger native blocksize LUNs, it eliminates the parity calculation for read-modify-write operations.<br><br>Thanks,<br>Paul<br><br>From: gpfsug-discuss-bounces@spectrumscale.org [<a href="mailto:gpfsug-discuss-bounces@spectrumscale.org" target="_blank" >mailto:gpfsug-discuss-bounces@spectrumscale.org</a>] On Behalf Of Simon Thompson (Research Computing - IT Services)<br>Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 9:44 AM<br>To: gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org<br>Subject: [gpfsug-discuss] Flash for metadata<br><br>Hi all<br><br>I'm currently about to deploy some flash systems (FS-900) to take our metadata for one of our Spectrum Scale file-systems. We use 4k inodes for this file-system.<br><br>On the FS-900, when creating a volume, we get a choice of 512b or 4k sectors. Does anyone have a suggestion on this? On a spinning disk RAID array, I get what a strip size is and we'd use multiples of the stripe where possible for the block size.<br><br>Is the sector size on the FS-900 the smallest chunk that can be written out? And so would it make sense to use 4k sectors for 4k GPFS inodes right?<br><br>Related. In the deployment guide for the FS-900 arrays, if one is using a file-system (e.g. XFS) on the array the guide talks about aligning the partitions with with array, when GPFS is used on a storage array, does it automatically work out the sector alignment?<br><br><br>Thanks<br><br>Simon<br>-------------- next part --------------<br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>URL: <<a href="http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss/attachments/20160516/f4964333/attachment-0001.html" target="_blank" >http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss/attachments/20160516/f4964333/attachment-0001.html</a>><br><br>------------------------------<br><br>Message: 3<br>Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 09:48:12 +0000<br>From: "Simon Thompson (Research Computing - IT Services)"<br><S.J.Thompson@bham.ac.uk><br>To: "'gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org'"<br><gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org><br>Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Flash for metadata<br>Message-ID:<br><CF45EE16DEF2FE4B9AA7FF2B6EE26545F577FC47@EX13.adf.bham.ac.uk><br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br><br><br>Hi Paul,<br><br>Thanks, interestingly the FS-900 only does raid5. I get no choice about that, I do get a sector size choice when I create a lun on it...<br><br>I was also wondering how gpfs would do a metadata update. Would it be smart enough to know the sector size was 512b and only modify that, or would it always do a read modify write on the whole 4k inode?<br><br>Simon<br><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: Sanchez, Paul [Paul.Sanchez@deshaw.com<<a href="mailto:Paul.Sanchez@deshaw.com" target="_blank" >mailto:Paul.Sanchez@deshaw.com</a>>]<br>Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 10:28 AM GMT Standard Time<br>To: gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org<br>Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Flash for metadata<br><br>Simon,<br><br>I can?t speak specifically to the FS-900, since I generally use Dell Compellent and NetApp EF arrays for flash today. But I also take care to ensure that the system pool metadata NSDs use RAID10 (or equivalent) rather than RAID5/6. For small 4K metadata writes, on a 4K blocksize LUN this could result in optimal writes. For larger native blocksize LUNs, it eliminates the parity calculation for read-modify-write operations.<br><br>Thanks,<br>Paul<br><br>From: gpfsug-discuss-bounces@spectrumscale.org [<a href="mailto:gpfsug-discuss-bounces@spectrumscale.org" target="_blank" >mailto:gpfsug-discuss-bounces@spectrumscale.org</a>] On Behalf Of Simon Thompson (Research Computing - IT Services)<br>Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 9:44 AM<br>To: gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org<br>Subject: [gpfsug-discuss] Flash for metadata<br><br>Hi all<br><br>I'm currently about to deploy some flash systems (FS-900) to take our metadata for one of our Spectrum Scale file-systems. We use 4k inodes for this file-system.<br><br>On the FS-900, when creating a volume, we get a choice of 512b or 4k sectors. Does anyone have a suggestion on this? On a spinning disk RAID array, I get what a strip size is and we'd use multiples of the stripe where possible for the block size.<br><br>Is the sector size on the FS-900 the smallest chunk that can be written out? And so would it make sense to use 4k sectors for 4k GPFS inodes right?<br><br>Related. In the deployment guide for the FS-900 arrays, if one is using a file-system (e.g. XFS) on the array the guide talks about aligning the partitions with with array, when GPFS is used on a storage array, does it automatically work out the sector alignment?<br><br><br>Thanks<br><br>Simon<br>-------------- next part --------------<br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>URL: <<a href="http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss/attachments/20160516/9dbf385b/attachment.html" target="_blank" >http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss/attachments/20160516/9dbf385b/attachment.html</a>><br><br>------------------------------<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>gpfsug-discuss mailing list<br>gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org<br><a href="http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss" target="_blank" >http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss</a><br><br><br>End of gpfsug-discuss Digest, Vol 52, Issue 20<br>**********************************************</font><br> </div></blockquote>
<div dir="ltr" > </div></div>
<BR>