[gpfsug-discuss] Manager nodes

Uwe Falke UWEFALKE at de.ibm.com
Tue Jan 24 17:36:22 GMT 2017


Hi, Kevin, 

I'd look for more cores on the expense of clock speed. You send data over 
routes involving much higher latencies than your CPU-memory combination 
has even in the slowest available clock rate, but GPFS with its 
multi-threaded appoach is surely happy if it can start a few more threads. 


 
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regards

 
Dr. Uwe Falke
 
IT Specialist
High Performance Computing Services / Integrated Technology Services / 
Data Center Services
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IBM Deutschland
Rathausstr. 7
09111 Chemnitz
Phone: +49 371 6978 2165
Mobile: +49 175 575 2877
E-Mail: uwefalke at de.ibm.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IBM Deutschland Business & Technology Services GmbH / Geschäftsführung: 
Frank Hammer, Thorsten Moehring
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Ehningen / Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, 
HRB 17122 




From:   "Buterbaugh, Kevin L" <Kevin.Buterbaugh at Vanderbilt.Edu>
To:     gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Date:   01/24/2017 04:18 PM
Subject:        Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Manager nodes
Sent by:        gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org



Hi Simon,

FWIW, we have two servers dedicated to cluster and filesystem management 
functions (and 8 NSD servers).  I guess you would describe our cluster as 
small to medium sized ? ~700 nodes and a little over 1 PB of storage.

Our two managers have 2 quad core (3 GHz) CPU?s and 64 GB RAM.  They?ve 
got 10 GbE, but we don?t use IB anywhere.  We have an 8 Gb FC SAN and we 
do have them connected in to the SAN so that they don?t have to ask the 
NSD servers to do any I/O for them.

I do collect statistics on all the servers and plunk them into an RRDtool 
database.  Looking at the last 30 days the load average on the two 
managers is in the 5-10 range.  Memory utilization seems to be almost 
entirely dependent on how parameters like the pagepool are set on them.

HTHAL?

Kevin

> On Jan 24, 2017, at 4:00 AM, Simon Thompson (Research Computing - IT 
Services) <S.J.Thompson at bham.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
> We are looking at moving manager processes off our NSD nodes and on to
> dedicated quorum/manager nodes.
> 
> Are there some broad recommended hardware specs for the function of 
these
> nodes.
> 
> I assume they benefit from having high memory (for some value of high,
> probably a function of number of clients, files, expected open files?, 
and
> probably completely incalculable, so some empirical evidence may be 
useful
> here?) (I'm going to ignore the docs that say you should have twice as
> much swap as RAM!)
> 
> What about cores, do they benefit from high core counts or high clock
> rates? For example would I benefit more form a high core count, low 
clock
> speed, or going for higher clock speeds and reducing core count? Or is
> memory bandwidth more important for manager nodes?
> 
> Connectivity, does token management run over IB or only over
> Ethernet/admin network? I.e. Should I bother adding IB cards, or just 
have
> fast Ethernet on them (my clients/NSDs all have IB).
> 
> I'm looking for some hints on what I would most benefit in investing in 
vs
> keeping to budget.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Simon
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gpfsug-discuss mailing list
> gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
> http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss







More information about the gpfsug-discuss mailing list