firstly, I want to thank you that you joined this mailing list and
your interest in this topic.
I think this is an important effort that we aim to achieve.
I recognize that this will only work, if there will be community that
Personally, my goal is to increase comparability for storage the sake
of everyone not just me or DKRZ. Moreover, I hope you have seen that
I'm willing to invest time for the discussion, testing and
But I appreciate and try to honor every input -- not ignoring a single
voice because I do not like this in such discussions either.
Let us have a look at the current status:
* We had quite some discussion about the features and flaws and
problems with current/future architectures.
* I tried to summarize the current status of the discussion of the list here:
* We aimed to have until the end of January: "Open discussion to
define goals, identify concerns, access patterns" => We did not meet
that goal, but based on the initial enthusiasm, that seemed possible
two month ago.
* I also moved along in respect to the metadata / small file
benchmarking proposing something but I'm not fixated to this, it is
just a suggestion based on my experience that I had for acceptance
testing for DKRZ while searching for acceptable metadata benchmarks.
Basically, I'm willing to run any benchmark on our system for
comparison reason, if you propose sth.
Also I would support to improve e.g., IOR, once the patterns are clear
and accepted by the community.
* I realized that there have not been much responses to pending emails lately.
Any technical input is important.
Also: if you have particular reasons how to improve the progress or
any personal reason why you don't like the current approach/status or
e.g. me :-) -- they are welcome.
For me, the next important step is still to ensure that access
patterns useful for current / future architectures and any middleware
can be identified.
I'm naive: I think we can be a wonderful community that can contribute
even to unfunded activities for the sake of everyone.