[gpfsug-discuss] GPFS and Lustre on same node

Salvatore Di Nardo sdinardo at ebi.ac.uk
Fri Aug 8 10:53:36 BST 2014

Well, i didn't wanted to start a rant against IBM, and I'm referring 
specifically to GSS.

Since GSS its an appliance, we have to refer to GSS support for both 
hardware and software issues. Hardware support in total crap. It took 1 
mounth of chasing and shouting to get a drawer replacement that was 
causing some issues. Meanwhile 10 disks in that drawer got faulty. 
Finally we got the drawer replace but the disks are still faulty. Now 
its 3 days i'm triing to get them fixed or replaced ( its not clear if 
they disks are broken of they was just marked to be replaced because of 
the drawer). Right now i dont have any answer about how to put them 
online ( mmchcarrier don't work because it recognize that the disk where 
not replaced)

There are also few other cases ( gpfs related)  open that are still not 
answered. I have no experience with direct GPFS support, but if i open a 
case to GSS for a GPFS problem, the cases seems never get an answer.

The only reason that GSS is working its because _*I*_**installed it 
spending few months studying gpfs. So now I'm wondering if its worth at 
all rely in future on the whole appliance concept.

I'm wondering if in future its better just purchase the hardware and 
install GPFS by our own, or in alternatively even try Lustre.

Now, skipping all this GSS rant, which have nothing to do with the file 
system anyway  and  going back to my question:

Could someone point the main differences between GPFS and Lustre?

I found some documentation about Lustre and i'm going to have a look, 
but oddly enough have not found any practical comparison between them.

On 06/08/14 11:19, Jez Tucker (Chair) wrote:
> "IBM support is almost unexistent"
> I don't find that at all.
> Do you log directly via ESC or via your OEM/integrator or are you only 
> referring to GSS support rather than pure GPFS?
> If you are having response issues, your IBM rep (or a few folks on 
> here) can accelerate issues for you.
> Jez
> On 06/08/14 10:57, Salvatore Di Nardo wrote:
>> Sorry for this little ot, but recetly i'm looking to Lustre to 
>> understand how it is comparable to GPFS in terms of performance, 
>> reliability and easy to use.
>> Could anyone share their experience ?
>> My company just recently got a first GPFS system , based on IBM GSS, 
>> but while its good performance wise, there are few unresolved 
>> problems and the IBM support is almost unexistent, so I'm starting to 
>> wonder if its work to look somewhere else eventual future purchases.
>> Salvatore
>> On 06/08/14 10:19, Frederik Ferner wrote:
>>> On 05/08/14 18:55, Scott Fadden wrote:
>>>> Is anyone running GPFS and Lustre on the same nodes. I have seen it
>>>> work, I have heard people are doing it, I am looking for some 
>>>> confirmation.
>>> Most of our compute cluster nodes are clients for Lustre and GPFS at 
>>> the same time. Lustre 1.8.9-wc1 and GPFS Nothing shared on 
>>> servers (GPFS NSD server or Lustre OSS/MDS servers).
>>> HTH,
>>> Frederik
>> _______________________________________________
>> gpfsug-discuss mailing list
>> gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org
>> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> gpfsug-discuss mailing list
> gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org
> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org/attachments/20140808/04e3e4ae/attachment-0003.htm>

More information about the gpfsug-discuss mailing list