[gpfsug-discuss] AFM gateway node scaling

[Matt Weil]

Also I found no documentation that advised against having the gateway
role on a nsd server.  There was advise to not run the gateway role on a
CES node.  What is the recommendation there.  Would a SAN client or
shared disk be preferred to keep the latency down.

Thanks

Matt

On 3/26/20 4:03 AM, Venkateswara R Puvvada wrote:
> Most of these recommendations documented in KC, we will add missing
> information on number of filesets and inodes per gateway in the next
> release.
>
> https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/STXKQY_5.0.4/com.ibm.spectrum.scale.v5r04.doc/bl1ins_gatewaynodefailureafm.htm
>
> ~Venkat (vpuvvada at in.ibm.com)
>
>
>
> From:        Matt Weil <mweil at wustl.edu>
> To:        gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
> Date:        03/25/2020 10:34 PM
> Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [gpfsug-discuss] AFM gateway node scaling
> Sent by:        gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> thank you thank you... I would like to see that in IBM documentation
> somewhere.
>
> On 3/25/20 11:50 AM, Venkateswara R Puvvada wrote:
> Matt,
>
> It is recommended to have dedicated AFM gateway nodes. Memory and CPU
> requirements for AFM gateway node depends on the number of filesets
> handled by the node and the inode usage of those filesets. Since AFM
> keeps track of changes in the memory, any network disturbance can
> cause the memory utilization to go high and which eventually leads to
> in-memory queue to be dropped. After the queue is dropped, AFM runs
> recovery to recover the lost operations which is expensive as it
> involves creating the snapshot, running policy scan, doing readdir
> from home/secondary and build the list of  lost operations. When the
> gateway node goes down, all the filesets handled by that node
> distributed to the remaining active gateway nodes. After the gateway
> node comes back, filesets are transferred back to the original gateway
> node. When designing the gateway node, make sure that it have enough
> memory , CPU resources for handling the incoming and outgoing data
> based on the bandwidth. Limit the filesets per gateway(ex. less than
> 20 filesets per gateway)  so that number of AFM recoveries triggered
> will be minimal when the queues are lost. Also limit the total number
> of inodes handled by the gateway node across all the filesets (ex.
> less than 400 million inodes per gateway).  AFM gateway nodes are
> licensed as server nodes.
>
>
> ~Venkat (_vpuvvada at in.ibm.com_ <mailto:vpuvvada at in.ibm.com>)
>
>
>
> From:        Matt Weil _<mweil at wustl.edu>_ <mailto:mweil at wustl.edu>
> To:        _gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org_
> <mailto:gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
> Date:        03/23/2020 11:39 PM
> Subject:        [EXTERNAL] [gpfsug-discuss] AFM gateway node scaling
> Sent by:        _gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org_
> <mailto:gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> Is there any guide and or recommendation as to how to scale this.
>
> filesets per gateway node?  Is it necessary to separate NSD server and
> gateway roles.  Are dedicated gateway nodes licensed as clients?
>
> Thanks for any guidance.
>
> Matt
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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_
> _______________________________________________
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org/attachments/20200326/fee01115/attachment-0002.htm>