[gpfsug-discuss] Placement Policy Installation and RDM Considerations

[Simon Thompson (Research Computing - IT Services)]

I can see exactly where Luke’s suggestion would be applicable.

We might have several hundred active research projects which would have some sort of internal identifier, so I can see why you’d want to do this sort of tagging as it would allow a policy scan to find files related to specific projects (for example).

Simon

From: Marc A Kaplan <makaplan at us.ibm.com<mailto:makaplan at us.ibm.com>>
Reply-To: gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org<mailto:gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org>>
Date: Thursday, 18 June 2015 14:18
To: gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org<mailto:gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org>>, "luke.raimbach at crick.ac.uk<mailto:luke.raimbach at crick.ac.uk>" <luke.raimbach at crick.ac.uk<mailto:luke.raimbach at crick.ac.uk>>
Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Placement Policy Installation and RDM Considerations

(2) Yes, 1MB is a limit on the total size in bytes of your policy rules.  Do you have a real need for more? Would you please show us such a scenario?  Beware that policy rules take some cpu cycles to evaluate...   So if for example, if you had several thousand SET POOL rules, you might notice some impact to file creation time.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org/attachments/20150618/3c0be60d/attachment-0003.htm>