Hi, On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 16:36:25 +0100 Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: > Am 23.12.2014 um 16:20 schrieb Andrew Savchenko: [...] > > We used it about a year ago for our infrastructure (backup and live > > sync of HA systems), obviously both servers and clients were used, > > both on Gentoo. We stopped this because of numerous kernel panics, > > not to mention that it was quite slow even after tuning. So we > > switch to another solution for data sync and backups: clsync. (It > > was developed from scratch for our needs, this is not a > > filesystem, but may be considered as more powerful alternative to > > lsyncd.) > > > > Though this was a year ago or so. Your mileage may vary and it is > > likely that during this year stability was improved. Ceph is very > > promising by both design and capabilities. > > I agree! > > I expect that there were many changes over the time of a year ... they > went from v0.72 (5th stable release) in Nov 2013 to v0.80 in May 2014 > (6th stable release) ... and v0.87 in Oct 2014 (7th ...) > > We get 0.80.7 in ~amd64 now ... I will see. > > Ad "slow": what kind of hardware did you use and how many nodes/osds?
We used 3 servers, where each server was both node and osd (that's our hardware limitation). Each machine had hardware alike 2x Xeon E5450, 16 GB and 2 Gbps network connectivity (via bonding of two 1 Gbps interfaces). We went through a lot of software and kernel tuning, this helped to solve many issues, but not all of them: ceph nodes still got kernel panics once in a while. This was unacceptable and we moved for other approaches to our issues. Best regards, Andrew Savchenko
pgplP4mXOrMjz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
