Il 02/03/2018 13:27, Federico Lucifredi ha scritto:
On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 4:29 AM, Max Cuttins <m...@phoenixweb.it
<mailto:m...@phoenixweb.it>> wrote:
Hi Federico,
Hi Max,
On Feb 28, 2018, at 10:06 AM, Max Cuttins
<m...@phoenixweb.it <mailto: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
<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").
I need to find an arbitrary non-virtual disk replacement strategy....
compatible with Xen.
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
They are somewhat interested in higher the limitation instead of
improving their hypervisor.
Xen 7.3 is _*exactly *_Xen 7.2 with new limitations and no added features.
It's a shame.
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
