cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From n..@li.nux.ro
Subject Re: [VOTE] Ceph, ZFS or Linux Soft RAID?
Date Mon, 15 Jul 2019 14:01:01 GMT
What's the use case exactly, what are you aiming to achieve?

Any layer you add will increase latency, NFS especially, even if it's 
local.


On 2019-07-15 14:56, Fariborz Navidan wrote:
> Thank you for opinions.
> 
> Also I would ask you another question. how would difference in mater of
> performance between pure local storage and local nfs storage (local 
> drives
> are exported and mounted on local machines)?
> 
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 6:15 PM Ivan Kudryavtsev 
> <kudryavtsev_ia@bw-sw.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> ZFS is not a good choice for high IO applications. Use the most simple
>> layering as possible.
>> 
>> пн, 15 июл. 2019 г., 18:50 Christoffer Pedersen <vrod@vrod.dk>:
>> 
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > ZFS is unfortunately not supported, otherwise I would have recommended
>> > that. But if you are going local systems (no nfs/iscsi), ext4 would be
>> the
>> > way to go.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 1:23 PM Ivan Kudryavtsev <
>> kudryavtsev_ia@bw-sw.com
>> > >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > if you use local fs, use just ext4 over the required disk topology
>> which
>> > > gives the desired redundancy.
>> > >
>> > > E.g. JBOD, R0 work well when data safety policy is established and
>> > backups
>> > > are maintained well.
>> > >
>> > > Otherwise look to R5, R10 or R6.
>> > >
>> > > пн, 15 июл. 2019 г., 18:05 <nux@li.nux.ro>:
>> > >
>> > > > Isn't that a bit apples and oranges? Ceph is a network distributed
>> > > > thingy, not a local solution.
>> > > >
>> > > > I'd use linux/software raid + lvm, it's the only one supported (by
>> > > > CentOS/RedHat).
>> > > >
>> > > > ZFS on Linux could be interesting if it was supported by Cloudstack,
>> > but
>> > > > it is not, you'd end up using qcow2 (COW) files on top of a COW
>> > > > filesystem which could lead to issues. Also ZFS is not really the
>> > > > fastest fs out there, though it does have some nice features.
>> > > >
>> > > > Did you really mean raid 0? I hope you have backups. :)
>> > > >
>> > > > hth
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On 2019-07-15 11:49, Fariborz Navidan wrote:
>> > > > > Hello,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Which one do you think is faster to use for local soft Raid-0
for
>> > > > > primary
>> > > > > storage? Ceph, ZFS or Built-in soft raid manager of CentOS? Which
>> one
>> > > > > can
>> > > > > gives us better IOPS and IO latency on NVMe SSD disks? The storage
>> > will
>> > > > > be
>> > > > > used for production cloud environment where arround 60 VMs will
run
>> > on
>> > > > > top
>> > > > > of it.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Your ides are highly appreciated
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Thanks,
>> > Chris pedersen
>> >
>> 

Mime
View raw message