Hi Sam,
Hmmm.... I think 3x redundancy is a bit much - we're not rolling in cash
:) To be honest, as long as there's an equivalent 'dpm-drain' command so
I can manually pull out storage when it's starting to give notice then
that would be fine. I was thinking of Lustre as I'd heard good things
about it but I have very little experience so wanted to check - though
if other people are using it and it's supported (to some degree anyway!)
then I'm happy to go with that if people think it's worth a go :)
Thanks,
Mark
On 05/11/13 13:45, Sam Skipsey wrote:
> Except that the POSIX bit of Ceph is considerably less polished than
> the rest of it, at the moment.
>
> Things to rule out: AFS.
>
> Things that might work: the usual suspects, in general (Lustre is
> fine, although doesn't automanage redistribution of storage across
> nodes, at present, so removing a volume is harder than adding one -
> but anything that *does* make removal of storage trivial also
> replicates / adds redundant blocks via parity, so you actually "lose
> space" to replicas etc).
>
> So, on that note: do you have money to overprovision storage beyond
> the bare needs (that is, can you afford to buy 3 times as much storage
> as you need, so you can run an HDFS system with the standard 3
> replicas of each block)?
>
> Sam
>
>
> On 5 November 2013 13:08, james Adams <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> CephFS--
>> Scanned by iCritical.
|