[GE users] sge db experiences

rayson rayrayson at gmail.com
Thu Feb 12 03:11:14 GMT 2009


The biggest advantage of classic spooling is the ease of backup &
recovery, but I/O is usually slow over NFS, so Berkeley DB spooling
which performs less I/O operations would offer an advantage in
performance.

However, with 5K jobs each, you are talking about 10K jobs per day.
And I/O operations are performed during job submit, job start, and job
end.

So some ballpark estimates:

10000 jobs per day / 24 hours per day / 60 mins per hour / 60 secs per min

= 0.12 jobs per second

Job submission has a few extra I/Os needed, esp. for directory
creation, job script spooling, etc... but even so the number of I/Os
needed by job related spooling should be less than a few per second. A
modern NFS server can easily handle the I/O workload. And if NFSv4 is
used (NFSv4 has a number of performance optimizations), and if the
qmaster is connected via a high speed network and/or connected to same
switch as the NFS server, then I believe classic spooling can handle
even more jobs per day than just 10K.

Of course, job submissions usually occur during work hours. So you may
need to monitor your cluster usage and do some detail estimates. And
you can always setup a test cluster with a node (the number of nodes
per cluster has much less impact on spooling performance, as most of
the node information is not spooled during normal cluster operation)
and see how your NFS server performs.

But BDB or classic is the same when you come to restore time if you
don't have backups of the spooling data!!

Rayson



On 2/11/09, reuti <reuti at staff.uni-marburg.de> wrote:
> > I wanted to hear about your experiences with the internal database,
> > and what would you recommend for a cluster with 700+ exec hosts,
> > bdb or classic text files (no bdb server in any case)
>
> With this number of nodes I would go for BDB for sure. There is a
> discussion about it at:
>
> http://gridengine.info/2008/01/24/why-i-love-classic-spooling
>
> -- Reuti
>
>
> >
> > Right now I have two clusters that will join to a single master
> > soon, and since I'm also upgrading to 6.2 this is a good time to
> > rethink the db strategy.
> >
> > Currently I have flat file bdb on both clusters (nfs4 mounted so I
> > can use shadow servers)
> >
> > Both clusters run over 5k jobs per day.
> >
> > Would using plain text have any advantages?
> >
> >
> > Yuval Adar, Marvell Israel - Senior UNIX System Administrator
> > Park Azorim, Kyriat Arie
> > Petah Tikva, 49527, Israel
> > Email: adary at marvell.com
> > Office: +972.3.9703958 - OnNet: 705.3958
> > Fax: +972.3.9704999
> > Mobile: +972.54.2493958
> > Web site: http://www.marvell.com
> >
> > This message may contain confidential, proprietary or legally
> > privileged information. The information is intended only for the
> > use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this
> > message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> > any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
> > strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in
> > error, please notify us immediately by telephone or by e-mail and
> > delete the message from your computer.
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> http://gridengine.sunsource.net/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=38&dsMessageId=103471
>
> To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe at gridengine.sunsource.net].
>

------------------------------------------------------
http://gridengine.sunsource.net/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=38&dsMessageId=103676

To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe at gridengine.sunsource.net].



More information about the gridengine-users mailing list