Hello Pete,
Peter Elmer wrote:
[...]
>> * Does this implie that the redirector cannot do load balancing
>> with those nodes ??
>
>
> With the existing olbd structure, you would have to create a hierarchy
> of redirectors, each with a group of 64 data servers. (But see below.)
>
bummer !!...
[...]
> At the moment you can build a hierarchy where each group of 64 has
> a redirector and then those subscriber to a meta-redirector. What Andy
OK, we will look into this.
[...]
>
> Probably the best bet is for you to use this self-organizing servers
> feature which Andy has been building. (I also wanted to do some testing
> of that.) I didn't realize that you had so many servers. Or are these
> the worker nodes you are trying to allow to serve data from their local
> disks?
Yes. 190 nodes have up to 150 GB of local disk space
the total of which makes quite a bit of space isn't it ... This
space is well served by rootd + our SUMS (scheduler) and hopefully
Xrootd will allow at first (without too much efforts) to make
static-population to a dynamic population (we have the "other"
advantages in mind too of course) ; the distributed-disk model
support would be a minimal objective ...
What is the reasonning behind the 64 limit ?? I have not
looked at the source code and wondering if this is a low level
limitation or a simple hard-coded choice ??
>
> (I was travelling and thus still need to catch up on various postings to
> this list from the last 4-5 days. Expect additional response over the next
> day or so as I read all of that!)
>
> Pete
>
--
,,,,,
( o o )
--m---U---m--
Jerome
