Re: [HPDD-discuss] Which stable version to install
Matt
I can¹t say that a clear answer jumps out from the below. If you want to
keep the door open to possibly interoperating to a 1.8.x release in the
future then 2.4.3 might be the best bet, but once you explore HSM you will
need 2.5.x. At this point in time, the information that I have suggests
2.4.x releases are being quite widely used, so a conservative approach
might be to move initially to 2.4.3 and then upgrade to a 2.5.x release
when you are ready to use HSM.
Let us know how you get on!
Peter
On 3/18/14, 7:57 AM, "Matt Bettinger" <iamatt(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
We currently run 2 lustre file systems 1.8.6 (qdr) and 1.8.8 (fdr).
We will be taking 1.8.6 off-line for an "upgrade" ( bare metal
reinstall of OS and lustre!) to 2.X.
I see quite a bit of activity on different releases which is a
confusing as to decide which release to install. What is the main
'stable' release that is suggested for a new 2.X installation? 2.5?
We are interested in looking at the newer tools such as lester,
robinhood, latest collectl, and the HSM bits. The interconnects are
Mellanox QDR to a very finicky IBM IB switch and fibre back end. The
OS is going to be RHEL or CentOs but does not matter however we would
prefer to use the lustre RPMs if possible so 6.4/6.5 I am guessing.
We have two MDS available on this system as well.
It is not a requirement that the 1.8.8 be able to talk to 2.X through
Linux gateway routers but things change and we may need to have 1.8.8
cross mount the new 2.x. Does that have any bearing on which 2.X
version we decide to land on? Thanks~
Matt Bettinger
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Jones, Peter A <peter.a.jones(a)intel.com>
wrote:
>
> Hi there
>
> Here is an update on the Lustre 2.6 release.
>
> Landings
> ========
>
> -A number of landings made
>http://git.whamcloud.com/?p=fs/lustre-release.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads
>/master
>
> Testing
> =======
>
> -Testing has continued on the 2.5.56 tag
>