http://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/ceph-volume/simple/

?

 

From: ceph-users <ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com> On Behalf Of Konstantin 
Shalygin
Sent: 08 June 2018 11:11
To: ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Why the change from ceph-disk to ceph-volume and lvm? 
(and just not stick with direct disk access)

 

What is the reasoning behind switching to lvm? Does it make sense to go 
through (yet) another layer to access the disk? Why creating this 
dependency and added complexity? It is fine as it is, or not?

In fact, the question is why one tool is replaced by another without saving 
functionality.
Why lvm, why not bcache?

It seems to me that in the heads dev team someone has pushed the idea that lvm 
solves all problems.
But this is also added the overhead, and since this is a kernel module with a 
update we can get a performance drop, changes in module settings, etc.
I understand that for Red Hat Storage this is a solution, but for a community 
with different distributions and hardware this may be superfluous.
I would like to get back possibility of preparing osd's with direct access was 
restored, and let it not be the default.
Also this will save configurations for ceph-ansible. Actually I was don't know 
what is create my osd's ceph-disk/ceph-volume or whatever before this 
deprecation.





k



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

Reply via email to