Re: topics for the file system mini-summit

[Ric Wheeler <ric@emc.com>]

Andreas Dilger wrote:

>On May 25, 2006  14:44 -0700, Ric Wheeler wrote:
>  
>
>>With both ext3 and with reiserfs, running a single large file system
>>translates into several practical limitations before we even hit the
>>existing size limitations:
>>
>>   ....
>>
>>I know that other file systems deal with scale better, but the question
>>is really how to move the mass of linux users onto these large and
>>increasingly common storage devices in a way that handles these challenges.
>>    
>>
>
>In a way what you describe is Lustre - it aggregates multiple "smaller"
>filesystems into a single large filesystem from the application POV
>(though in many cases "smaller" filesystems are 2TB).  It runs e2fsck
>in parallel if needed, has smart object allocation (clients do delayed
>allocation, can load balance across storage targets, etc), can run with
>down storage targets.
>
>Cheers, Andreas
>--
>Andreas Dilger
>Principal Software Engineer
>Cluster File Systems, Inc.
>
>
>  
>
The approach that lustre takes here is great -  distributed systems 
typically  take into account subcomponent failures as a fact of life & 
do this better than many single system designs...

The challenge is still there on the "smaller" file systems that make up 
Lustre - you can spend a lot of time waiting for just one fsck to finish ;-)

ric