On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 4:29 AM, Max Cuttins <m...@phoenixweb.it> wrote:
> > > Hi Federico, > > Hi Max, >> >> On Feb 28, 2018, at 10:06 AM, Max Cuttins <m...@phoenixweb.it> wrote: >>> >>> This is true, but having something that just works in order to have >>> minimum compatibility and start to dismiss old disk is something you should >>> think about. >>> You'll have ages in order to improve and get better performance. But you >>> should allow Users to cut-off old solutions as soon as possible while >>> waiting for a better implementation. >>> >> I like your thinking, but I wonder why doesn’t a locally-mounted kRBD >> volume meet this need? It seems easier than iSCSI and I would venture would >> show twice the performance at least in some cases. >> > > Simple because it's not possible. > XenServer is closed. You cannot add RPM (so basically install ceph) > without hack the distribution by removing the limitation to YUM. > And this is what we do here: https://github.com/rposudnevskiy/RBDSR Understood. Thanks Max, I did not realize you were also speaking about Xen, I thought you meant to find an arbitrary non-virtual disk replacement strategy ("start to dismiss old disk"). We do speak to the Xen team every once in a while, but while there is interest in adding Ceph support on their side, I think we are somewhat down the list of their priorities. Thanks -F
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
