Hi all,

I also would like to see cephfs stable, especially  with the snapshot function.
I tried to figure out the roadmap but couldn't get a clear picture?
Is there a target date for production-ready snapshot-functionality?

until than a possible alternative (sorry without ceph :-/)
is using glusterfs which can be really fast.
2 years ago I had a setup utilizing raid6 bricks consisting each of 7+1hotspare 
disks (1TB sata)
several of them in a gluster stripe connected via 4GB FC (needed to be cheap 
;-) to a server (debian)
that exported the space via samba.
I liked it because it was:
- really fast
- really robust
- as cheap as poss (for huge productive data IMHO)
- easy to set up and maintain
- smoothly scalable ad infinitum
(one can start with one server, one raid-array than grow for volume and 
redundancy/off-site replication)

big drawback: no snapshots, no easy readonly / cow functionality,
that's what I hope cephfs will bring us!
I tried it since some days, and it works, mds hasn't crashed (yet ;-)
it took 2TB of data with acceptable performance - BUT
erasing that data is a no go :-(  13MB/s??

Again, is there any roadmap on cephfs (incl. snaps?)

best regards 
Bernhard





> Actually #3 is a novel idea, I have not thought of it. Thinking about the 
> difference just off the top of my head though, comparatively, #3 will have 


> 1) more overheads (because of the additional VM)
> 
> 2) Can't grow once you reach the hard limit of 14TB, and if you have multiple 
> of such machines, then fragmentation becomes a problem
> > 

> 
> 3) might have the risk of 14TB partition corruption wiping out all your shares
> 
> 4) not as easy as HA. Although I have not worked HA into NFSCEPH yet, it 
> should be doable by drdb-ing the NFS data directory, or any other techniques 
> that people use for redundant NFS servers.
> > 


> - WP
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:26 PM, Gautam Saxena > <> gsax...@i-a-inc.com> >>  
> wrote:
> > Yip,
> > I went to the link. Where can the script ( nfsceph) be downloaded? How's 
> > the robustness and performance of this technique? (That is, is there are 
> > any reason to believe that it would more/less robust and/or performant than 
> > option #3 mentioned in the original thread?)
> > > > 



> > 
> > 
> > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 1:57 AM, YIP Wai Peng > > <> > 
> > yi...@comp.nus.edu.sg> > >> >  wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Gautam Saxena > > > <> > > 
> > > gsax...@i-a-inc.com> > > >> > >  wrote:

> > > > 1) nfs over rbd (> > > > 
> > > > http://www.sebastien-han.fr/blog/2012/07/06/nfs-over-rbd/> > > > )
> > > > > > > > 




> > > > 
> > > We are now running this - basically an intermediate/gateway node that 
> > > mounts ceph rbd objects and exports them as NFS. > > > 
> > > http://waipeng.wordpress.com/2013/11/12/nfsceph/
> > > 
> > > - WP
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > > > 

> > 

> > 
> > 
-- 

Bernhard GlommNetwork & System AdministratorEcologic 
institutebernhard.gl...@ecologic.euwww.ecologic.eu


> > 
> > 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to