[Pvfs2-users] rpm .spec file, fuse support, and more
ligon at omnibond.com
Mon Mar 12 17:40:26 EST 2012
See responses below:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Jim Kusznir <jkusznir at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all:
> I'm still on PVFS 2.8.2 on my cluster, but enough things have been
> going wrong that I'm finally getting some traction toward upgrading.
> Furthermore, we're beginning work on an interoperability project that
> will make our pvfs2 storage available on another cluster. As I look
> into OrangeFS, I'm finding that I'm full of questions, and so far
> haven't found much useful documentation. There's the "high level
> features", the list of open projects, but I haven't found much with
> what currently works and how to build for various platforms.
> For example, on my cluster, all packages must be rpms. I've got a
> spec file that I used to build both the pvfs2 userspace and a seperate
> one for the kernel modules, but for pvfs-2.8.2 (It was actually for
> several versions earlier that I bumped up a few times). At this
> point, I suspect I need a new .spec file, and I'm not very good at
> writing them. As I recall, there used to be a .spec file in the pvfs2
> source tarball, but I couldn't find one this time. Is there a .spec
> file for building OrangeFS into rpm(s)?
OrangeFS does not provide an rpm SPEC file. Here at Clemson, we created
our own rpm and I have a spec file for that; however, it is tailored to our
specific environment. If you're interested, I can send you my SPEC file to
use as a model.
> Second question: fuse support
> It seems that the vast majority of my difficulty has come with the
> kernel module. Furthermore, the cluster I'm trying to intertie with
> has stated that they will NOT load a kernel module on that cluster.
> My users of course have no clue about MPI-IO, and have no desire to
> rewrite portions of their code to make use of it; they do all their
> I/O via standard filesystem calls. So, is the kernel module still my
> best/only option, or is there a fuse or other module? Is the fuse
> module "faster/better" than the kernel module (by staying in
> Of cousre, the other cluster owner would prefer that I just provide an
> NFS export for him to add to the automount table...Is that fessable?
I don't recommend using NFS. It will slow down OrangeFS and not all
commands work properly with an NFS mount.
> Presently my cluster headnode is a pvfs2-client, and it
> crashes/reboots frequently as a result of I/O intensive activities on
> it (eg, sftps, tarball creation/expansion on a pvfs2 volume, etc). So
> re-exporting my pvfs2 volume as NFS from this node seems like a bad
> idea (especially as it also hosts the user home directories for the
> cluster). Also, in general it seems that my pvfs2 performance has
> been pretty poor in general, especially from this node, and as such
> I'm quite concerned about that.
In OrangeFS, we now have a user library that you can preload that allows
you to use the system like you would with the kernel module. It bypasses
the kernel module AND the client core.
> Finally, anything special I should be aware of with OrangeFS upgrade
> and interoperability?
> Pvfs2-users mailing list
> Pvfs2-users at beowulf-underground.org
OrangeFS Support and Development
Anderson, South Carolina
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pvfs2-users