Search Results

Search found 4 results on 1 pages for 'isilon'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

• Intermittent NFS lockups on Isilon cluster

  - by blackbox222

  We have an Isilon cluster with 8 IQ 12000x nodes which exports storage via several NFS shares for a handful of Linux and Solaris clients. There is a Linux system that has one of these NFS filesystems mounted. I/O to this filesystem is moderately heavy from the Linux system. Every 3-4 weeks (it's not on any kind of discernible schedule, and sometimes is more/less frequent than this), we notice that all activity ceases on this NFS mount (the process hangs, as if the network stopped working so process is stuck in uninterruptible sleep) - 30 minutes later, the share recovers and things continue to work normally. The kernel log from the affected machine is as follows: Dec 3 10:07:29 redacted kernel: [8710020.871993] nfs: server nfs-redacted not responding, still trying Dec 3 10:37:17 redacted kernel: [8711805.966130] nfs: server nfs-redacted OK relevant /etc/fstab line: nfs-redacted:/ifs/nfs/export_data/shared/...redacted... /data nfs defaults 0 0 I've checked to see if there are any scheduled processes e.g. cron jobs, Isilon related functions e.g. snapshots, etc that might be causing these hangups but I can't seem to find anything. I'm also not aware of any network related issues or maintenance that would cause this. All of the lockups last almost exactly 30 minutes per the kernel logs. Perhaps someone has some suggestions I could try? (I considered a soft mount to avoid the problems associated with processes accessing the filesystem hanging; however am wary of the corruption that could result and it would not really solve the underlying issue anyway).

  Read the article

• Multi-petabyte scale out storage solution [closed]

  - by Alex Yuriev

  Let's say that I have a need to have a single-name space scale to multi-petabyte object store with a file system-like wrapper. What is currently out there that supports the following: Single name space that can take 1B files. Support for multiple entry points using NFS At least node level replication ( preferably node and file level replication ) Online software upgrades No "magic sauce" on the storage layer The following has been evaluated: Gluster & Lustre - just ick - fundamental lack of understanding of why online upgrades are mandatory. OneFS - we have it. It is smelling more and more like it hides a dead body under the hood. Other than MapR and zfs am I missing anything? P.S. Oh yes, I keep forgetting that the forums are for people to discuss if 2TB drive actually stores 2TB info. May bad. Seriously though - how the heck can "meets the following requirements" can be considered a "debate"? P.P.S. I did not throw an idiotic insult - i pointed out that this is actually an interesting question compared to a conversation about storage capacity of a 2TB hard drive. It is not a question of what works better - it is a question that asks did I miss any of the products that currently exist which fit the criteria where criteria is clearly outline. I got one answer below which included something that I have not looked at in a long time which looks quite a bit grown up compared to the time I briefly look at it before.

  Read the article

• Suggested Web Application Framework and Database for Enterprise, “Big-Data” App?

  - by willOEM

  I have a web application that I have been developing for a small group within my company over the past few years, using Pipeline Pilot (plus jQuery and Python scripting) for web development and back-end computation, and Oracle 10g for my RDBMS. Users upload experimental genomic data, which is parsed into a database, and made available for querying, transformation, and reporting. Experimental data sets are large and have many layers of metadata. A given experimental data record might have a foreign key relationship with a table that describes this data point's assay. Assays can cover multiple genes, which can have multiple transcript, which can have multiple mutations, which can affect multiple signaling pathways, etc. Users need to approach this data from any point in those layers in the metadata. Since all data sets for a given data type can run over a billion rows, this results in some large, dynamic queries that are hard to predict. New data sets are added on a weekly basis (~1GB per set). Experimental data is never updated, but the associated metadata can be updated weekly for a few records and yearly for most others. For every data set insert the system sees, there will be between 10 and 100 selects run against it and associated data. It is okay for updates and inserts to run slow, so long as queries run quick and are as up-to-date as possible. The application continues to grow in size and scope and is already starting to run slower than I like. I am worried that we have about outgrown Pipeline Pilot, and perhaps Oracle (as the sole database). Would a NoSQL database or an OLAP system be appropriate here? What web application frameworks work well with systems like this? I'd like the solution to be something scalable, portable and supportable X-years down the road. Here is the current state of the application: Web Server/Data Processing: Pipeline Pilot on Windows Server + IIS Database: Oracle 10g, ~1TB of data, ~180 tables with several billion-plus row tables Network Storage: Isilon, ~50TB of low-priority raw data

  Read the article

• 150 TB and growing, but how to grow?

  - by seandavi

  My group currently has two largish storage servers, both NAS running debian linux. The first is an all-in-one 24-disk (SATA) server that is several years old. We have two hardware RAIDS set up on it with LVM over those. The second server is 64 disks divided over 4 enclosures, each a hardware RAID 6, connected via external SAS. We use XFS with LVM over that to create 100TB useable storage. All of this works pretty well, but we are outgrowing these systems. Having build two such servers and still growing, we want to build something that allows us more flexibility in terms of future growth, backup options, that behaves better under disk failure (checking the larger filesystem can take a day or more), and can stand up in a heavily concurrent environment (think small computer cluster). We do not have system administration support, so we administer all of this ourselves (we are a genomics lab). So, what we seek is a relatively low-cost, acceptable performance storage solution that will allow future growth and flexible configuration (think ZFS with different pools having different operating characteristics). We are probably outside the realm of a single NAS. We have been thinking about a combination of ZFS (on openindiana, for example) or btrfs per server with glusterfs running on top of that if we do it ourselves. What we are weighing that against is simply biting the bullet and investing in Isilon or 3Par storage solutions. Any suggestions or experiences are appreciated.

  Read the article

1