On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:41 AM, Stuart Longland <stua...@vrt.com.au> wrote: > On 03/06/14 02:24, Mark Nelson wrote: >> It's kind of a tough call. Your observations regarding the downsides of >> using NFS with RBD are apt. You could try throwing another distributed >> storage system on top of RBD and use Ceph for the replication/etc, but >> that's not really ideal either. CephFS is relatively stable with >> active/standby MDS configurations, but it may still have bugs and there >> are no guarantees or official support (yet!). > > The big thorn in the side here is when people on Windows clients want to > effectively access CephFS. I'm not sure if there's a Win32 port of FUSE > that cephfs-fuse could be ported to. So until then you're stuck with > trying to cluster Samba or putting up with a bottleneck/single > point-of-failure. > > I understand that for CephFS: the officially supported configuration is > a single MDS where as MDS HA is a work in progress. At the time when I > was setting up our Ceph cluster, CephFS was considered experimental even > though in testing it seemed to be working fine, so I left that bit out > of the production cluster, figuring I'd add it later.
Single MDS means single active MDS. You can have one or more standby MDS. If the active MDS crashes, the standby MDS will takeover. > > If I deploy an MDS, and that machine goes down, is it > possible/sufficient to deploy a MDS to another node to get back up and > running without data loss? > -- > Stuart Longland > Systems Engineer > _ ___ > \ /|_) | T: +61 7 3535 9619 > \/ | \ | 38b Douglas Street F: +61 7 3535 9699 > SYSTEMS Milton QLD 4064 http://www.vrt.com.au > > > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list > ceph-users@lists.ceph.com > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
