Depending on what your security requirements are, you may not have a choice. If your OpenStack deployment shouldn't be able to load the Kubernetes RBDs (or vice versa), then you need to keep them separate and maintain different keyrings for the 2 services. If that is going to be how you go about it, I would recommend starting with a relatively low number of PGs in both pools and figure out what the distribution of data between them ends up being by the time you're 40-50% full and increase PG counts accordingly. If you can put them into the same pool, I don't see a reason why you shouldn't, unless you foresee a time when you want to move one of them, but not the other to a new cluster or faster storage. Having them separate would allow you to change them to a different crush rule to put them on different storage in the same cluster and some sort of rados tool to copy a pool to a new cluster would do the other (less likely than possibly changing the crush rule for different types of storage).
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 2:57 PM Frank Ritchie <frankaritc...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > I am planning for a new Ceph cluster that will provide RBD storage for > OpenStack and Kubernetes. Additionally, there may need a need for a small > amount of RGW storage. > > Which option would be better: > > 1. Defining separate pools for OpenStack images/ephemeral > vms/volumes/backups (as seen here https://ceph.com/pgcalc/) along with > pools for Kubernetes and RGW. > > 2. Define a single block storage pool (to be used by OpenStack and > Kubernetes) and an object pool (for RGW). > > I am not sure how much space each component will require at this time. > > thx > Frank > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list > ceph-users@lists.ceph.com > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
