DOCSLIB.ORG

DVS, GPFS and External Lustre at NERSC - How It's Working on Hopper

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
DVS, GPFS and External Lustre at NERSC - How It's Working on Hopper DVS, GPFS and External Lustre at NERSC - How It's Working on Hopper Tina Butler, Rei Chi Lee and Gregory F. Butler, National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center ABSTRACT: Providing flexible, reliable and high performance access to user data is an ongoing problem for HPC centers. This paper will discuss how NERSC has partitioned its storage resources between local and global filesystems, and the configuration, functionality, operation and performance of these several different parallel filesystems in use on NERSC's Cray XE6, Hopper. KEYWORDS: Filesystems, GPFS, Lustre, DVS NERSC NERSC and Global Filesystems The National Energy Research Scientific At the end of the 1990's NERSC was Computing Center (NERSC) is the primary high procuring and integrating a large IBM SP3 performance computing (HPC) facility for cluster, Seaborg. As part of that procurement, scientific research sponsored by the Office of NERSC chose to provide all user storage on Science in the US Department of Energy. Seaborg using IBM's Global Parallel File System NERSC is operated by Lawrence Berkeley (GPFS). GPFS was quite new at that time, and National Laboratory (LBNL) and provides there were some concerns about using a computing resources for more than 4000 filesystem originally designed for multi-media researchers worldwide annually. NERSC has a streaming for user home directories. However, highly diverse workload and supports after some growing pains, and a number of applications at a wide range of scales and problem reports and fixes, GPFS proved to be a computational intensity. reliable and high performance filesystem. Around the same time, it became clear that user data was an increasingly significant issue NERSC systems from both management and productivity To support that range of users and perspectives. Users run codes and do pre- and applications, NERSC fields a new large system post-processing on multiple machines, and about every three years, and keeps each large therefore need access to their data in multiple system for 6-7 years. Smaller mid-range or places. Copying files around and keeping them special purpose systems are installed synchronized is a waste of researchers valuable periodically. time and a waste of significant amounts of Current NERSC systems include: storage. In 2001, NERSC started the Global Unified Hopper (NERSC-6), a Cray XE6, with 6384 Parallel File System (GUPFS) project. The goal 24-core nodes, 1.28 PF peak. of the project was to provide a scalable, high Franklin (NERSC-5) a Cray XT4 with 9532 performance, high bandwidth shared filesystem 4-core nodes, 356 TF peak, for all NERSC production computing and Carver, an IBM iDataplex cluster with 400 support systems. The primary purpose of the 8-core nodes GUPFS project was to make it easier to conduct Magellan, an IBM iDataplex cluster; cloud advanced scientific research using NERSC computing testbed systems. This was to be accomplished through PDSF, throughput commodity cluster the use of a shared filesystem providing a unified Euclid, a Sunfire analytics system file namespace, operating on consolidated shared Dirac, a GPU testbed storage that could be directly accessed by all HPSS, an archival HSM storage system NERSC production systems. The first phase of NGF, the center-wide shared filesystem the project was to evaluate emerging technologies in shared/clustered filesystem 1 software, high performance storage area network Cray systems required a new software layer. (SAN) fabrics and high performance storage Directly mounting GPFS filesystems on devices to determine which combination of Franklin’s 9,532 compute nodes was not hardware and software best fulfilled the technically or financially feasible. Fortunately, requirements for a center-wide shared filesystem. Cray had acquired the rights to the Data The second phase of the project was a staged Virtualization Service (DVS) software originally deployment of the chosen technologies in a developed by Extreme Scale (later Cassatt). production environment. A significant number of DVS essentially provides I/O forwarding candidates for the various technologies were services for an underlying filesystem client. assessed on the GUPFS testbed system. While XT login nodes were able to directly In October 2005 the first center-wide shared mount the NGF filesystems, using DVS on XT filesystem instance was deployed at NERSC service nodes allowed the GPFS-based based on DDN and Engenio storage, Fibre filesystems to be accessed by XT compute Channel (FC) fabric and GPFS. GPFS’s nodes. This capability was a major productivity resilience, remote clustering features and data gain for NERSC users. management policies made it the choice for the Hopper’s externalized architecture NERSC’s center-wide filesystem. This first Hopper, NERSC’s newest system, is a Cray instance of the NERSC Global Filesystem XE6. Hopper is the first large system that (NGF), /project, was designed to support NERSC has procured since NGF was deployed collaborative projects that used multiple systems as a production resource. The existence of NGF in their workflow. Initially /project provided 70 was a major factor in the architecting of the TB of high performance, permanent storage Hopper system. First, Hopper has two external served over Fibre Channel and Ethernet; it has scratch filesystems; the filesystems are Lustre- been extremely popular and has grown to 873 based, but were designed to be easily detached TB, with expansion to 1.5 PB coming later this and incorporated into NGF at a later time if year. NERSC so chose. In the external filesystems, the metadata and object storage servers are After the demonstrated success of /project, commodity Linux servers – the connection to the NERSC deployed NGF instances for user home interior of the XE6 is via Lustre Routers (LNET) directories (/global/u1 and /global/u2) and on XIO service nodes. system common areas for shared software NERSC also chose to externalize the login (/global/common). These smaller filesystems are nodes for Hopper. At the time that Hopper was served over 10 Gb Ethernet and are tuned for being procured, Franklin was having issues with smaller block sizes and moderate performance. overloaded internal login nodes, and interconnect The latest NGF filesystem put in production is a instability. Externalizing the login functionality global scratch area with size and performance allowed the incorporation of commodity servers similar to /project. All NERSC production with more memory, processors and swap space systems are using NGF filesystems; Carver, than internal service nodes. The external login Magellan, Euclid and Dirac are using NGF nodes and external filesystems were seen as a exclusively – they have no local user-writable way to provide an environment where users can storage. access their files, do pre- and post-processing, NGF and Cray systems develop codes, and submit jobs even if the large At the time that NGF was entering compute resource was unavailable. The external production, NERSC’s largest system was environment was designed to have as few Franklin, a Cray XT4. Cray’s filesystem of dependencies on the internal XE6 resources as choice for XT systems has been Lustre. The possible. The external login nodes also have all standard Lustre installation on a Cray system NGF filesystems mounted. DVS is used on includes directly attached storage arrays and Hopper to project the NGF filesystems to metadata and object storage servers on service compute nodes. Hopper external nodes are nodes. Access to the Lustre filesystem(s) from shown in Table 1. compute nodes running a lightweight OS is Another benefit of the externalized server provided by a lightweight Lustre client. design became apparent when NERSC and Cray Franklin was delivered with local Lustre agreed to a phased delivery for the Hopper filesystems for user home directories and scratch system. The first phase of Hopper was a space. Making NGF filesystems accessible on modestly sized XT5, but included all the 2 externalized login and filesystem servers and Hopper’s configuration storage. The intent was to integrate the external Hopper’s internal node types and counts are storage and login nodes into the NERSC shown in Table 2; overall system configuration infrastructure in Phase 1 and resolve any issues is shown in Figure 1. The compute partition of prior to Phase 2 delivery. NERSC ended up the system has 6384 dual socket 2.1 GHz Magny being able to keep the Phase 1 system available Cours 12 core-based nodes providing 153,216 for users while the Phase 2 XE6 was installed cores. Hopper can produce 3,677,184 CPU and integrated by splitting the login nodes and hours per day. external scratch filesystems between the two To support the compute partition, Hopper systems. When the time came to move the has several types of service nodes. Services that second external Lustre filesystem to the XE6, the require an external interface like Lustre routers lifetime of the XT5 system was extended by (IB), network nodes (10 GbE), or DVS (FC or transitioning user files to the NGF-based IB) are sited on the latest version of Cray’s /global/scratch. service node, the XIO. Services that do not Quantity Node Type require direct outside access like Torque or PBS MOM nodes can be put on repurposed compute 12 External Login Nodes nodes. This allows more flexible configuration 4 External Data Mover Nodes of these services and provides the greater 52 Storage server nodes (Lustre OSS) resources of the compute node to the serial 4 Metadata server nodes (Lustre portion of the running application. On Franklin, MDS) there have been frequent problems with 26 LSI Engenio 7900 storage system oversubscription of resources on MOM nodes. 208 16-slot drive enclosures This has been mitigated on Hopper through the 3120 1 TB 7.2K RPM SATA drives use of repurposed compute nodes. The other 2 LSI Engenio 3992 for metadata type of service node that can reside easily on a 24 450 GB 15K RPM FC drives for repurposed compute node is a shared root DVS metadata server.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Elastic Storage for Linux on System Z IBM Research & Development Germany
    Peter Münch T/L Test and Development – Elastic Storage for Linux on System z IBM Research & Development Germany Elastic Storage for Linux on IBM System z © Copyright IBM Corporation 2014 9.0 Elastic Storage for Linux on System z Session objectives • This presentation introduces the Elastic Storage, based on General Parallel File System technology that will be available for Linux on IBM System z. Understand the concepts of Elastic Storage and which functions will be available for Linux on System z. Learn how you can integrate and benefit from the Elastic Storage in a Linux on System z environment. Finally, get your first impression in a live demo of Elastic Storage. 2 © Copyright IBM Corporation 2014 Elastic Storage for Linux on System z Trademarks The following are trademarks of the International Business Machines Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. AIX* FlashSystem Storwize* Tivoli* DB2* IBM* System p* WebSphere* DS8000* IBM (logo)* System x* XIV* ECKD MQSeries* System z* z/VM* * Registered trademarks of IBM Corporation The following are trademarks or registered trademarks of other companies. Adobe, the Adobe logo, PostScript, and the PostScript logo are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Adobe Systems Incorporated in the United States, and/or other countries. Cell Broadband Engine is a trademark of Sony Computer Entertainment, Inc. in the United States, other countries, or both and is used under license therefrom. Intel, Intel logo, Intel Inside, Intel Inside logo, Intel Centrino, Intel Centrino logo, Celeron, Intel Xeon, Intel SpeedStep, Itanium, and Pentium are trademarks or registered trademarks of Intel Corporation or its subsidiaries in the United States and other countries.
    [Show full text]
  • The Parallel File System Lustre
    The parallel file system Lustre Roland Laifer STEINBUCH CENTRE FOR COMPUTING - SCC KIT – University of the State Rolandof Baden Laifer-Württemberg – Internal and SCC Storage Workshop National Laboratory of the Helmholtz Association www.kit.edu Overview Basic Lustre concepts Lustre status Vendors New features Pros and cons INSTITUTSLustre-, FAKULTÄTS systems-, ABTEILUNGSNAME at (inKIT der Masteransicht ändern) Complexity of underlying hardware Remarks on Lustre performance 2 16.4.2014 Roland Laifer – Internal SCC Storage Workshop Steinbuch Centre for Computing Basic Lustre concepts Client ClientClient Directory operations, file open/close File I/O & file locking metadata & concurrency INSTITUTS-, FAKULTÄTS-, ABTEILUNGSNAME (in der Recovery,Masteransicht ändern)file status, Metadata Server file creation Object Storage Server Lustre componets: Clients offer standard file system API (POSIX) Metadata servers (MDS) hold metadata, e.g. directory data, and store them on Metadata Targets (MDTs) Object Storage Servers (OSS) hold file contents and store them on Object Storage Targets (OSTs) All communicate efficiently over interconnects, e.g. with RDMA 3 16.4.2014 Roland Laifer – Internal SCC Storage Workshop Steinbuch Centre for Computing Lustre status (1) Huge user base about 70% of Top100 use Lustre Lustre HW + SW solutions available from many vendors: DDN (via resellers, e.g. HP, Dell), Xyratex – now Seagate (via resellers, e.g. Cray, HP), Bull, NEC, NetApp, EMC, SGI Lustre is Open Source INSTITUTS-, LotsFAKULTÄTS of organizational-, ABTEILUNGSNAME
    [Show full text]
  • A Fog Storage Software Architecture for the Internet of Things Bastien Confais, Adrien Lebre, Benoît Parrein
    A Fog storage software architecture for the Internet of Things Bastien Confais, Adrien Lebre, Benoît Parrein To cite this version: Bastien Confais, Adrien Lebre, Benoît Parrein. A Fog storage software architecture for the Internet of Things. Advances in Edge Computing: Massive Parallel Processing and Applications, IOS Press, pp.61-105, 2020, Advances in Parallel Computing, 978-1-64368-062-0. 10.3233/APC200004. hal- 02496105 HAL Id: hal-02496105 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02496105 Submitted on 2 Mar 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. November 2019 A Fog storage software architecture for the Internet of Things Bastien CONFAIS a Adrien LEBRE b and Benoˆıt PARREIN c;1 a CNRS, LS2N, Polytech Nantes, rue Christian Pauc, Nantes, France b Institut Mines Telecom Atlantique, LS2N/Inria, 4 Rue Alfred Kastler, Nantes, France c Universite´ de Nantes, LS2N, Polytech Nantes, Nantes, France Abstract. The last prevision of the european Think Tank IDATE Digiworld esti- mates to 35 billion of connected devices in 2030 over the world just for the con- sumer market. This deep wave will be accompanied by a deluge of data, applica- tions and services.
    [Show full text]
  • IBM Spectrum Scale CSI Driver for Container Persistent Storage
    Front cover IBM Spectrum Scale CSI Driver for Container Persistent Storage Abhishek Jain Andrew Beattie Daniel de Souza Casali Deepak Ghuge Harald Seipp Kedar Karmarkar Muthu Muthiah Pravin P. Kudav Sandeep R. Patil Smita Raut Yadavendra Yadav Redpaper IBM Redbooks IBM Spectrum Scale CSI Driver for Container Persistent Storage April 2020 REDP-5589-00 Note: Before using this information and the product it supports, read the information in “Notices” on page ix. First Edition (April 2020) This edition applies to Version 5, Release 0, Modification 4 of IBM Spectrum Scale. © Copyright International Business Machines Corporation 2020. Note to U.S. Government Users Restricted Rights -- Use, duplication or disclosure restricted by GSA ADP Schedule Contract with IBM Corp. iii iv IBM Spectrum Scale CSI Driver for Container Persistent Storage Contents Notices . vii Trademarks . viii Preface . ix Authors. ix Now you can become a published author, too . xi Comments welcome. xii Stay connected to IBM Redbooks . xii Chapter 1. IBM Spectrum Scale and Containers Introduction . 1 1.1 Abstract . 2 1.2 Assumptions . 2 1.3 Key concepts and terminology . 3 1.3.1 IBM Spectrum Scale . 3 1.3.2 Container runtime . 3 1.3.3 Container Orchestration System. 4 1.4 Introduction to persistent storage for containers Flex volumes. 4 1.4.1 Static provisioning. 4 1.4.2 Dynamic provisioning . 4 1.4.3 Container Storage Interface (CSI). 5 1.4.4 Advantages of using IBM Spectrum Scale storage for containers . 5 Chapter 2. Architecture of IBM Spectrum Scale CSI Driver . 7 2.1 CSI Component Overview. 8 2.2 IBM Spectrum Scale CSI driver architecture.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Active Storage Strategies for the Lustre Parallel File System
    Evaluation of Active Storage Strategies for the Lustre Parallel File System Juan Piernas Jarek Nieplocha Evan J. Felix Pacific Northwest National Pacific Northwest National Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Laboratory Laboratory P.O. Box 999 P.O. Box 999 P.O. Box 999 Richland, WA 99352 Richland, WA 99352 Richland, WA 99352 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT umes of data remains a challenging problem. Despite the Active Storage provides an opportunity for reducing the improvements of storage capacities, the cost of bandwidth amount of data movement between storage and compute for moving data between the processing nodes and the stor- nodes of a parallel filesystem such as Lustre, and PVFS. age devices has not improved at the same rate as the disk ca- It allows certain types of data processing operations to be pacity. One approach to reduce the bandwidth requirements performed directly on the storage nodes of modern paral- between storage and compute devices is, when possible, to lel filesystems, near the data they manage. This is possible move computation closer to the storage devices. Similarly by exploiting the underutilized processor and memory re- to the processing-in-memory (PIM) approach for random ac- sources of storage nodes that are implemented using general cess memory [16], the active disk concept was proposed for purpose servers and operating systems. In this paper, we hard disk storage systems [1, 15, 24]. The active disk idea present a novel user-space implementation of Active Storage exploits the processing power of the embedded hard drive for Lustre, and compare it to the traditional kernel-based controller to process the data on the disk without the need implementation.
    [Show full text]
  • File Systems and Storage
    FILE SYSTEMS AND STORAGE On Making GPFS Truly General DEAN HILDEBRAND AND FRANK SCHMUCK Dean Hildebrand manages the PFS (also called IBM Spectrum Scale) began as a research project Cloud Storage Software team that quickly found its groove supporting high performance comput- at the IBM Almaden Research ing (HPC) applications [1, 2]. Over the last 15 years, GPFS branched Center and is a recognized G expert in the field of distributed out to embrace general file-serving workloads while maintaining its original and parallel file systems. He pioneered pNFS, distributed design. This article gives a brief overview of the origins of numer- demonstrating the feasibility of providing ous features that we and many others at IBM have implemented to make standard and scalable access to any file GPFS a truly general file system. system. He received a BSc degree in computer science from the University of British Columbia Early Days in 1998 and a PhD in computer science from Following its origins as a project focused on high-performance lossless streaming of multi- the University of Michigan in 2007. media video files, GPFS was soon enhanced to support high performance computing (HPC) [email protected] applications, to become the “General Parallel File System.” One of its first large deployments was on ASCI White in 2002—at the time, the fastest supercomputer in the world. This HPC- Frank Schmuck joined IBM focused architecture is described in more detail in a 2002 FAST paper [3], but from the outset Research in 1988 after receiving an important design goal was to support general workloads through a standard POSIX inter- a PhD in computer science face—and live up to the “General” term in the name.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Performance Variation in Modern Storage Stacks
    On the Performance Variation in Modern Storage Stacks Zhen Cao1, Vasily Tarasov2, Hari Prasath Raman1, Dean Hildebrand2, and Erez Zadok1 1Stony Brook University and 2IBM Research—Almaden Appears in the proceedings of the 15th USENIX Conference on File and Storage Technologies (FAST’17) Abstract tions on different machines have to compete for heavily shared resources, such as network switches [9]. Ensuring stable performance for storage stacks is im- In this paper we focus on characterizing and analyz- portant, especially with the growth in popularity of ing performance variations arising from benchmarking hosted services where customers expect QoS guaran- a typical modern storage stack that consists of a file tees. The same requirement arises from benchmarking system, a block layer, and storage hardware. Storage settings as well. One would expect that repeated, care- stacks have been proven to be a critical contributor to fully controlled experiments might yield nearly identi- performance variation [18, 33, 40]. Furthermore, among cal performance results—but we found otherwise. We all system components, the storage stack is the corner- therefore undertook a study to characterize the amount stone of data-intensive applications, which become in- of variability in benchmarking modern storage stacks. In creasingly more important in the big data era [8, 21]. this paper we report on the techniques used and the re- Although our main focus here is reporting and analyz- sults of this study. We conducted many experiments us- ing the variations in benchmarking processes, we believe ing several popular workloads, file systems, and storage that our observations pave the way for understanding sta- devices—and varied many parameters across the entire bility issues in production systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Lustre* Software Release 2.X Operations Manual Lustre* Software Release 2.X: Operations Manual Copyright © 2010, 2011 Oracle And/Or Its Affiliates
    Lustre* Software Release 2.x Operations Manual Lustre* Software Release 2.x: Operations Manual Copyright © 2010, 2011 Oracle and/or its affiliates. (The original version of this Operations Manual without the Intel modifications.) Copyright © 2011, 2012, 2013 Intel Corporation. (Intel modifications to the original version of this Operations Man- ual.) Notwithstanding Intel’s ownership of the copyright in the modifications to the original version of this Operations Manual, as between Intel and Oracle, Oracle and/or its affiliates retain sole ownership of the copyright in the unmodified portions of this Operations Manual. Important Notice from Intel INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED IN CONNECTION WITH INTEL PRODUCTS. NO LICENSE, EXPRESS OR IM- PLIED, BY ESTOPPEL OR OTHERWISE, TO ANY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IS GRANTED BY THIS DOCUMENT. EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN INTEL'S TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SALE FOR SUCH PRODUCTS, INTEL ASSUMES NO LIABILITY WHATSO- EVER AND INTEL DISCLAIMS ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTY, RELATING TO SALE AND/OR USE OF INTEL PRODUCTS INCLUDING LIABILITY OR WARRANTIES RELATING TO FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, MERCHANTABILITY, OR IN- FRINGEMENT OF ANY PATENT, COPYRIGHT OR OTHER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHT. A "Mission Critical Application" is any application in which failure of the Intel Product could result, directly or indirectly, in personal injury or death. SHOULD YOU PURCHASE OR USE INTEL'S PRODUCTS FOR ANY SUCH MISSION CRITICAL APPLICATION, YOU SHALL IN- DEMNIFY AND HOLD INTEL AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES, SUBCONTRACTORS AND AFFILIATES, AND THE DIRECTORS, OFFICERS, AND EMPLOYEES OF EACH, HARMLESS AGAINST ALL CLAIMS COSTS, DAMAGES, AND EXPENSES AND REASONABLE AT- TORNEYS' FEES ARISING OUT OF, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, ANY CLAIM OF PRODUCT LIABILITY, PERSONAL INJURY, OR DEATH ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF SUCH MISSION CRITICAL APPLICATION, WHETHER OR NOT INTEL OR ITS SUBCON- TRACTOR WAS NEGLIGENT IN THE DESIGN, MANUFACTURE, OR WARNING OF THE INTEL PRODUCT OR ANY OF ITS PARTS.
    [Show full text]
  • Filesystems HOWTO Filesystems HOWTO Table of Contents Filesystems HOWTO
    Filesystems HOWTO Filesystems HOWTO Table of Contents Filesystems HOWTO..........................................................................................................................................1 Martin Hinner < [email protected]>, http://martin.hinner.info............................................................1 1. Introduction..........................................................................................................................................1 2. Volumes...............................................................................................................................................1 3. DOS FAT 12/16/32, VFAT.................................................................................................................2 4. High Performance FileSystem (HPFS)................................................................................................2 5. New Technology FileSystem (NTFS).................................................................................................2 6. Extended filesystems (Ext, Ext2, Ext3)...............................................................................................2 7. Macintosh Hierarchical Filesystem − HFS..........................................................................................3 8. ISO 9660 − CD−ROM filesystem.......................................................................................................3 9. Other filesystems.................................................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • A Sense of Time for Node.Js: Timeouts As a Cure for Event Handler Poisoning
    A Sense of Time for Node.js: Timeouts as a Cure for Event Handler Poisoning Anonymous Abstract—The software development community has begun to new Denial of Service attack that can be used against EDA- adopt the Event-Driven Architecture (EDA) to provide scalable based services. Our Event Handler Poisoning attack exploits web services. Though the Event-Driven Architecture can offer the most important limited resource in the EDA: the Event better scalability than the One Thread Per Client Architecture, Handlers themselves. its use exposes service providers to a Denial of Service attack that we call Event Handler Poisoning (EHP). The source of the EDA’s scalability is also its Achilles’ heel. Multiplexing unrelated work onto the same thread re- This work is the first to define EHP attacks. After examining EHP vulnerabilities in the popular Node.js EDA framework and duces overhead, but it also moves the burden of time sharing open-source npm modules, we explore various solutions to EHP- out of the thread library or operating system and into the safety. For a practical defense against EHP attacks, we propose application itself. Where OTPCA-based services can rely on Node.cure, which defends a large class of Node.js applications preemptive multitasking to ensure that resources are shared against all known EHP attacks by making timeouts a first-class fairly, using the EDA requires the service to enforce its own member of the JavaScript language and the Node.js framework. cooperative multitasking [89]. An EHP attack identifies a way to defeat the cooperative multitasking used by an EDA-based Our evaluation shows that Node.cure is effective, broadly applicable, and offers strong security guarantees.
    [Show full text]
  • Parallel File Systems for HPC Introduction to Lustre
    Parallel File Systems for HPC Introduction to Lustre Piero Calucci Scuola Internazionale Superiore di Studi Avanzati Trieste November 2008 Advanced School in High Performance and Grid Computing Outline 1 The Need for Shared Storage 2 The Lustre File System 3 Other Parallel File Systems Parallel File Systems for HPC Cluster & Storage Piero Calucci Shared Storage Lustre Other Parallel File Systems A typical cluster setup with a Master node, several computing nodes and shared storage. Nodes have little or no local storage. Parallel File Systems for HPC Cluster & Storage Piero Calucci The Old-Style Solution Shared Storage Lustre Other Parallel File Systems • a single storage server quickly becomes a bottleneck • if the cluster grows in time (quite typical for initially small installations) storage requirements also grow, sometimes at a higher rate • adding space (disk) is usually easy • adding speed (both bandwidth and IOpS) is hard and usually involves expensive upgrade of existing hardware • e.g. you start with an NFS box with a certain amount of disk space, memory and processor power, then add disks to the same box Parallel File Systems for HPC Cluster & Storage Piero Calucci The Old-Style Solution /2 Shared Storage Lustre • e.g. you start with an NFS box with a certain amount of Other Parallel disk space, memory and processor power File Systems • adding space is just a matter of plugging in some more disks, ot ar worst adding a new controller with an external port to connect external disks • but unless you planned for
    [Show full text]
  • Lustre* with ZFS* SC16 Presentation
    Lustre* with ZFS* Keith Mannthey, Lustre Solutions Architect Intel High Performance Data Division Legal Information • All information provided here is subject to change without notice. Contact your Intel representative to obtain the latest Intel product specifications and roadmaps • Tests document performance of components on a particular test, in specific systems. Differences in hardware, software, or configuration will affect actual performance. Consult other sources of information to evaluate performance as you consider your purchase. For more complete information about performance and benchmark results, visit http://www.intel.com/performance. • Intel technologies’ features and benefits depend on system configuration and may require enabled hardware, software or service activation. Performance varies depending on system configuration. No computer system can be absolutely secure. Check with your system manufacturer or retailer or learn more at http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/software/intel-solutions-for-lustre-software.html. • Intel technologies may require enabled hardware, specific software, or services activation. Check with your system manufacturer or retailer. • You may not use or facilitate the use of this document in connection with any infringement or other legal analysis concerning Intel products described herein. You agree to grant Intel a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to any patent claim thereafter drafted which includes subject matter disclosed herein. • No license (express or implied, by estoppel or otherwise)
    [Show full text]