mdtest-hard issue
by Osamu Tatebe
Hi,
I would like to remind an issue regarding mdtest-hard benchmark. It
creates files in a single directory for at least five minutes. When
the metadata performance is more improved, the greater number of files
will be created. This will hit the limit of the number of files in a
single directory.
Actually, the limit of Lustre file system is about 8M files although
it depends the length of the pathname. When the metadata performance
is better than 27K IOPS, it is not possible to execute the mdtest-hard
create benchmark for five minutes since the number of files is larger
than 8M.
This is a reason we cannot submit the Lustre result. I expect this
will be quite common when the metadata performance is more improved.
Regards,
Osamu
---
Osamu Tatebe, Ph.D.
Center for Computational Sciences, University of Tsukuba
1-1-1 Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 3058577 Japan
5 years, 6 months
Vendor involvement
by Julian Kunkel
Dear all,
the steering committee has discussed the matter of vendor involvement.
Based on the outcome, we decided to include a new advisory body.
Therefore, the current bodies are:
* Community (e.g., this list, BoFs, etc.)
* Advisory vendor committee
* Steering committee
The "advisory vendor committee" provides a closed but fair playing
field for all vendors to discuss issues. Its purpose is to encourage
the vendors to participate, but allowing vendors to benefit from
further information.
The exact rules are under discussion and we welcome suggestions
(particularly from vendors);
at the moment, we envision, that information about the *full* and
*ranked* list are pre-released on that new list. This allows vendors
to 1) provide feedback; 2) prepare promotional material before SC /
ISC.
There are various options; e.g., the system names of other vendors are
obfuscated while all data is visible; only ranking is visible; data is
approximated; and so forth.
Surely, the data must not be released and be treated under NDA by any vendor.
We want to discuss this matter (particularly with vendors) and
envision to do so during SC in individual meetings; just reach out to
committee(a)io500.org, if you want to talk about this individually.
Alternatively, you can submit to the new mailing list [1] and submit
your suggestion there. Note though, that then every other vendor will
be able to read your email.
[1] https://www.vi4io.org/mailman/listinfo/io-500-vendors
If you are a vendor; feel free to submit.
We welcome any comments to this modification from the general
community. We think it is important to involve the vendors better to
get the general acceptance of the benchmark.
Best,
Julian
5 years, 7 months
We need your opinion to promote IO-500
by Georgios Markomanolis
Dear all,
We are looking forward to evolving more IO-500 and to be used across many HPC sites. IO-500 is a community-driven benchmark that's why we would be grateful if you could send us promising quotes about your experience with IO-500. We would like to advertise IO-500 through your words, what is better than your voice? Please send us your quote through an email to committee(a)io500.org<mailto:committee@io500.org> or just answer to the current email.
Best regards,
George
?
________________________________
This message and its contents including attachments are intended solely for the original recipient. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, please notify me immediately and delete this message from your computer system. Any unauthorized use or distribution is prohibited. Please consider the environment before printing this email.
5 years, 8 months
