 |
 |
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.