Den fre 14 juni 2019 kl 15:47 skrev Sean Redmond :
> Hi James,
> Thanks for your comments.
> I think the CPU burn is more of a concern to soft iron here as they are
> using low power ARM64 CPU's to keep the power draw low compared to using
> Intel CPU's where like you say the problem maybe less of
Hi James,
Thanks for your comments.
I think the CPU burn is more of a concern to soft iron here as they are
using low power ARM64 CPU's to keep the power draw low compared to using
Intel CPU's where like you say the problem maybe less of a concern.
Using less power by using ARM64 and providing E
I can't speak to the SoftIron solution, but I have done some testing on an
all-SSD environment comparing latency, CPU, etc between using the Intel ISA
plugin and using Jerasure. Very little difference is seen in CPU and
capability in my tests, so I am not sure of the benefit.
David Byte
Sr. Te
Also the picture I saw at Cephalocon - which could have been
inaccurate, looked to me as if it multiplied the data path.
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 8:27 AM Janne Johansson wrote:
>
> Den fre 14 juni 2019 kl 13:58 skrev Sean Redmond :
>>
>> Hi Ceph-Uers,
>> I noticed that Soft Iron now have hardware
Den fre 14 juni 2019 kl 13:58 skrev Sean Redmond :
> Hi Ceph-Uers,
> I noticed that Soft Iron now have hardware acceleration for Erasure
> Coding[1], this is interesting as the CPU overhead can be a problem in
> addition to the extra disk I/O required for EC pools.
> Does anyone know if any other
Hi Ceph-Uers,
I noticed that Soft Iron now have hardware acceleration for Erasure
Coding[1], this is interesting as the CPU overhead can be a problem in
addition to the extra disk I/O required for EC pools.
Does anyone know if any other work is ongoing to support generic FPGA
Hardware Acceleratio
