<font size=2 face="sans-serif">Just a extra note: Multi-cluster (mmremotefs)
does not always mean "network" for file system data transfer.
If both cluster(s) see the storage over the SAN then the data happens
over that path. This is common in a localized scenario for authorization
reasons (i.e. nodes 1,2,3 can access file systems A & B, but not C;
but nodes 4,5,6 in a separate cluster can access all 3 file systems)</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>------------------<br>Glen Corneau<br>Power Systems</font><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Washington Systems Center<br>gcorneau@us.ibm.com</font><br><br><img src=cid:_2_0B64D7080B64D480005B29F8862580F3 style="border:0px solid;"><br><br><br><br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">From:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Marc A Kaplan/Watson/IBM@IBMUS</font><br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">To:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">gpfsug main discussion
list <gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org></font><br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">Date:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">03/30/2017 11:27 AM</font><br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">Subject:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Re: [gpfsug-discuss]
AFM vs mmremotefs</font><br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">Sent by:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">gpfsug-discuss-bounces@spectrumscale.org</font><br><hr noshade><br><br><br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">I think you "got it" - despite
the name "remote" - mmremotefs is an access method and a way
of organizing your data and machines into several clusters - which can
work great if your network(s) are fast enough. For example you can
have one or more client clusters with no GPFS(Spectrum Scale) file systems
stored "locally". And one or several clusters that
are servers to those client clusters. </font><font size=3><br></font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>AFM is about caching and replicating files... You might do that
because of "remote-ness" - or for other reasons...</font><font size=3><br></font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>--marc</font><font size=3><br><br><br></font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>From: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">"Mark.Bush@siriuscom.com"
<Mark.Bush@siriuscom.com></font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>To: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">gpfsug
main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org></font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>Date: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">03/30/2017
12:09 PM</font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>Subject: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">[gpfsug-discuss]
AFM vs mmremotefs</font><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif"><br>Sent by: </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">gpfsug-discuss-bounces@spectrumscale.org</font><font size=3><br></font><hr noshade><font size=3><br><br></font><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>When does it make sense to use mmremotefs vs AFM? With mmremotefs
the actual data lives on the remote cluster right so if you need data closer
then AFM make more sense to use? If the clusters get disconnected
with mmremotefs I have not access to the data with AFM I do. <br> <br>Do I have these concepts right in my head?<br> <br> <br> <br> </font><font size=3><br></font><img src=cid:_4_0BB662080BB654E4005B29F8862580F3 width=171 height=59 alt=id:image001.png@01D2709D.6EF65720 style="border:0px solid;"><font size=2 face="Calibri"><b><br>Mark R. Bush</b>| <b>Storage Architect</b><br>Mobile: 210-237-8415 <br>Twitter: </font><a href=https://twitter.com/bushmr><font size=2 color=#0082bf face="Calibri"><u>@bushmr</u></font></a><font size=2 face="Calibri">|
LinkedIn: </font><a href=https://www.linkedin.com/in/markreedbush><font size=2 color=#0082bf face="Calibri"><u>/markreedbush</u></font></a><font size=2 face="Calibri"><br>10100 Reunion Place, Suite 500, San Antonio, TX 78216</font><font size=3 color=blue><u><br></u></font><a href=http://www.siriuscom.com/><font size=2 color=#0082bf face="Calibri"><u>www.siriuscom.com</u></font></a><font size=2 face="Calibri">|</font><a href=mailto:mark.bush@siriuscom.com><font size=2 color=#0082bf face="Calibri"><u>mark.bush@siriuscom.com</u></font></a><font size=3 face="Calibri"><br> </font><p><font size=1 face="Cambria">This message (including any attachments)
is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is
addressed and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary,
privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited. This message may be viewed by parties at Sirius Computer Solutions
other than those named in the message header. This message does not contain
an official representation of Sirius Computer Solutions. If you have received
this communication in error, notify Sirius Computer Solutions immediately
and (i) destroy this message if a facsimile or (ii) delete this message
immediately if this is an electronic communication. Thank you. </font><p><a href=http://www.siriuscom.com/><font size=2 color=#0082bf face="Calibri"><b><u>Sirius
Computer Solutions</u></b></font></a><font size=3> </font><tt><font size=2>_______________________________________________<br>gpfsug-discuss mailing list<br>gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org</font></tt><font size=3 color=blue><u><br></u></font><a href="http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss"><tt><font size=2 color=blue><u>http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss</u></font></tt></a><p><tt><font size=2>_______________________________________________<br>gpfsug-discuss mailing list<br>gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org<br></font></tt><a href="http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss"><tt><font size=2>http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2><br></font></tt><p><p><BR>