From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anthony Liguori Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 1/1] ceph/rbd block driver for qemu-kvm Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 16:29:54 -0500 Message-ID: <4BF5A9D2.5080609@codemonkey.ws> References: <20100519192222.GD61706@ncolin.muc.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Christian Brunner Cc: Blue Swirl , kvm@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: ceph-devel.vger.kernel.org On 05/20/2010 04:18 PM, Christian Brunner wrote: > Thanks for your comments. I'll send an updated patch in a few days. > > Having a central storage system is quite essential in larger hosting > environments, it enables you to move your guest systems from one node > to another easily (live-migration or dynamic restart). Traditionally > this has been done using SAN, iSCSI or NFS. However most of these > systems don't scale very well and and the costs for high-availability > are quite high. > > With new approaches like Sheepdog or Ceph, things are getting a lot > cheaper and you can scale your system without disrupting your service. > The concepts are quite similar to what Amazon is doing in their EC2 > environment, but they certainly won't publish it as OpenSource anytime > soon. > > Both projects have advantages and disadvantages. Ceph is a bit more > universal as it implements a whole filesystem. Sheepdog is more > feature complete in regards of managing images (e.g. snapshots). Both > projects require some additional work to become stable, but they are > on a good way. > > I would really like to see both drivers in the qemu tree, as they are > the key to a design shift in how storage in the datacenter is being > built. > I'd be more interested in enabling people to build these types of storage systems without touching qemu. Both sheepdog and ceph ultimately transmit I/O over a socket to a central daemon, right? So could we not standardize a protocol for this that both sheepdog and ceph could implement? Regards, Anthony Liguori > Christian > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=53496 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OFDJY-00019u-F1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 20 May 2010 17:30:03 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OFDJW-00077i-PO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 20 May 2010 17:30:00 -0400 Received: from mail-yw0-f184.google.com ([209.85.211.184]:49893) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OFDJW-00077a-Jd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 20 May 2010 17:29:58 -0400 Received: by ywh14 with SMTP id 14so194989ywh.25 for ; Thu, 20 May 2010 14:29:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4BF5A9D2.5080609@codemonkey.ws> Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 16:29:54 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 1/1] ceph/rbd block driver for qemu-kvm References: <20100519192222.GD61706@ncolin.muc.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Christian Brunner Cc: Blue Swirl , ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org On 05/20/2010 04:18 PM, Christian Brunner wrote: > Thanks for your comments. I'll send an updated patch in a few days. > > Having a central storage system is quite essential in larger hosting > environments, it enables you to move your guest systems from one node > to another easily (live-migration or dynamic restart). Traditionally > this has been done using SAN, iSCSI or NFS. However most of these > systems don't scale very well and and the costs for high-availability > are quite high. > > With new approaches like Sheepdog or Ceph, things are getting a lot > cheaper and you can scale your system without disrupting your service. > The concepts are quite similar to what Amazon is doing in their EC2 > environment, but they certainly won't publish it as OpenSource anytime > soon. > > Both projects have advantages and disadvantages. Ceph is a bit more > universal as it implements a whole filesystem. Sheepdog is more > feature complete in regards of managing images (e.g. snapshots). Both > projects require some additional work to become stable, but they are > on a good way. > > I would really like to see both drivers in the qemu tree, as they are > the key to a design shift in how storage in the datacenter is being > built. > I'd be more interested in enabling people to build these types of storage systems without touching qemu. Both sheepdog and ceph ultimately transmit I/O over a socket to a central daemon, right? So could we not standardize a protocol for this that both sheepdog and ceph could implement? Regards, Anthony Liguori > Christian > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >