* Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ; login:
@ 2014-06-02 18:32 Filippos Giannakos
2014-06-02 18:51 ` [ceph-users] " Patrick McGarry
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Filippos Giannakos @ 2014-06-02 18:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ceph-users-idqoXFIVOFJgJs9I8MT0rw,
ceph-devel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
Hello all,
As you may already know, we have been using Ceph for quite some time now to back
the ~okeanos [1] public cloud service, which is powered by Synnefo [2].
A few months ago we were kindly invited to write an article about our
experiences with Ceph for the USENIX ;login: magazine. The article is out in
this month's (June '14) issue and we are really happy to share it with you all:
https://www.usenix.org/publications/login/june14/giannakos
In the article we describe our storage needs, how we use Ceph and how it has
worked so far. I hope you enjoy reading it.
Kind Regards,
Filippos
[1] http://okeanos.grnet.gr
[2] http://www.synnefo.org
--
Filippos
<philipgian-Sqt7GMbKoOQ@public.gmane.org>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread* Re: [ceph-users] Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ; login: 2014-06-02 18:32 Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ; login: Filippos Giannakos @ 2014-06-02 18:51 ` Patrick McGarry 2014-06-02 21:40 ` Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ;login: Robin H. Johnson 2014-06-02 22:37 ` [ceph-users] Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ; login: Ian Colle 2 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Patrick McGarry @ 2014-06-02 18:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Filippos Giannakos; +Cc: ceph-users@lists.ceph.com, Ceph Devel This is great. Thanks for sharing Filippos! Best Regards, Patrick McGarry Director, Community || Inktank http://ceph.com || http://inktank.com @scuttlemonkey || @ceph || @inktank On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Filippos Giannakos <philipgian@grnet.gr> wrote: > Hello all, > > As you may already know, we have been using Ceph for quite some time now to back > the ~okeanos [1] public cloud service, which is powered by Synnefo [2]. > > A few months ago we were kindly invited to write an article about our > experiences with Ceph for the USENIX ;login: magazine. The article is out in > this month's (June '14) issue and we are really happy to share it with you all: > > https://www.usenix.org/publications/login/june14/giannakos > > In the article we describe our storage needs, how we use Ceph and how it has > worked so far. I hope you enjoy reading it. > > Kind Regards, > Filippos > > [1] http://okeanos.grnet.gr > [2] http://www.synnefo.org > > -- > Filippos > <philipgian@grnet.gr> > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list > ceph-users@lists.ceph.com > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ;login: 2014-06-02 18:32 Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ; login: Filippos Giannakos 2014-06-02 18:51 ` [ceph-users] " Patrick McGarry @ 2014-06-02 21:40 ` Robin H. Johnson 2014-06-03 9:12 ` Constantinos Venetsanopoulos 2014-06-02 22:37 ` [ceph-users] Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ; login: Ian Colle 2 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Robin H. Johnson @ 2014-06-02 21:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ceph-devel On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 09:32:19PM +0300, Filippos Giannakos wrote: > As you may already know, we have been using Ceph for quite some time now to back > the ~okeanos [1] public cloud service, which is powered by Synnefo [2]. (Background info for other readers: Synnefo is a cloud layer on top of Ganeti). > In the article we describe our storage needs, how we use Ceph and how it has > worked so far. I hope you enjoy reading it. Are you just using the existing kernel RBD mapping for Ganeti running KVM, or did you implement the pieces for Ganeti to use the QEMU userspace RBD driver? I've got both Ceph & Ganeti clusters already, but am reluctant to marry the two sets of functionality because the kernel RBD driver still seemed to perform so much worse than the Qemu userspace RBD driver, and Ganeti still hasn't implemented the userspace mapping pieces :-( -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Developer, Infrastructure Lead E-Mail : robbat2@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ;login: 2014-06-02 21:40 ` Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ;login: Robin H. Johnson @ 2014-06-03 9:12 ` Constantinos Venetsanopoulos 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Constantinos Venetsanopoulos @ 2014-06-03 9:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Robin H. Johnson, ceph-devel Hello Robin, On 6/3/14, 24:40 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 09:32:19PM +0300, Filippos Giannakos wrote: >> As you may already know, we have been using Ceph for quite some time now to back >> the ~okeanos [1] public cloud service, which is powered by Synnefo [2]. > (Background info for other readers: Synnefo is a cloud layer on top of > Ganeti). > >> In the article we describe our storage needs, how we use Ceph and how it has >> worked so far. I hope you enjoy reading it. > Are you just using the existing kernel RBD mapping for Ganeti running > KVM, or did you implement the pieces for Ganeti to use the QEMU > userspace RBD driver? Non of the above. From the Ceph project we are just using RADOS, which we access via an Archipelago [1] backend driver that uses librados from userspace. We integrate Archipelago with Ganeti with the Archipelago ExtStorage provider. > I've got both Ceph & Ganeti clusters already, but am reluctant to marry > the two sets of functionality because the kernel RBD driver still seemed > to perform so much worse than the Qemu userspace RBD driver, and Ganeti > still hasn't implemented the userspace mapping pieces :-( > Ganeti supports accessing RADOS from userspace (via the qemu-rbd driver) since version 2.10. The current stable is 2.11. Not only that, but starting v2.13 (not released yet), you will be able to configure the access method per-disk, e.g. saying that the first disk of the instance will be kernel backed and the second userspace backed. So, I'd suggest you give it a try and see how it goes :) Thanks, Constantinos [1] https://www.synnefo.org/docs/archipelago/latest/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [ceph-users] Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ; login: 2014-06-02 18:32 Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ; login: Filippos Giannakos 2014-06-02 18:51 ` [ceph-users] " Patrick McGarry 2014-06-02 21:40 ` Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ;login: Robin H. Johnson @ 2014-06-02 22:37 ` Ian Colle [not found] ` <1235448490.9762058.1401748668812.JavaMail.zimbra-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> 2 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Ian Colle @ 2014-06-02 22:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Filippos Giannakos; +Cc: ceph-users, ceph-devel Thanks, Filippos! Very interesting reading. Are you comfortable enough yet to remove the RAID-1 from your architecture and get all that space back? Ian R. Colle Global Director of Software Engineering Red Hat (Inktank is now part of Red Hat!) http://www.linkedin.com/in/ircolle http://www.twitter.com/ircolle Cell: +1.303.601.7713 Email: icolle@redhat.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Filippos Giannakos" <philipgian@grnet.gr> To: ceph-users@lists.ceph.com, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org Sent: Monday, June 2, 2014 11:32:19 AM Subject: [ceph-users] Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ; login: Hello all, As you may already know, we have been using Ceph for quite some time now to back the ~okeanos [1] public cloud service, which is powered by Synnefo [2]. A few months ago we were kindly invited to write an article about our experiences with Ceph for the USENIX ;login: magazine. The article is out in this month's (June '14) issue and we are really happy to share it with you all: https://www.usenix.org/publications/login/june14/giannakos In the article we describe our storage needs, how we use Ceph and how it has worked so far. I hope you enjoy reading it. Kind Regards, Filippos [1] http://okeanos.grnet.gr [2] http://www.synnefo.org -- Filippos <philipgian@grnet.gr> _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <1235448490.9762058.1401748668812.JavaMail.zimbra-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ; login: [not found] ` <1235448490.9762058.1401748668812.JavaMail.zimbra-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> @ 2014-06-04 14:22 ` Filippos Giannakos 2014-06-05 6:59 ` Christian Balzer 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Filippos Giannakos @ 2014-06-04 14:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ian Colle Cc: ceph-users-idqoXFIVOFJgJs9I8MT0rw, ceph-devel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA Hello Ian, Thanks for your interest. On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 06:37:48PM -0400, Ian Colle wrote: > Thanks, Filippos! Very interesting reading. > > Are you comfortable enough yet to remove the RAID-1 from your architecture and > get all that space back? Actually, we are not ready to do that yet. There are three major things to consider. First, to be able to get rid of the RAID-1 setup, we need to increase the replication level to at least 3x. So the space gain is not that great to begin with. Second, this operation can take about a month for our scale according to our calculations and previous experience. During this period of increased I/O we might get peaks of performance degradation. Plus, we currently do not have the necessary hardware available to increase the replication level before we get rid of the RAID setup. Third, we have a few disk failures per month. The RAID-1 setup has allowed us to seamlessly replace them without any hiccup or even a clue to the end user that something went wrong. Surely we can rely on RADOS to avoid any data loss, but if we currently rely on RADOS for recovery there might be some (minor) performance degradation, especially for the VM I/O traffic. Kind Regards, -- Filippos <philipgian-Sqt7GMbKoOQ@public.gmane.org> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ; login: 2014-06-04 14:22 ` Filippos Giannakos @ 2014-06-05 6:59 ` Christian Balzer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Christian Balzer @ 2014-06-05 6:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Filippos Giannakos Cc: ceph-users-idqoXFIVOFJgJs9I8MT0rw, ceph-devel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA Hello Filippos, On Wed, 4 Jun 2014 17:22:35 +0300 Filippos Giannakos wrote: > Hello Ian, > > Thanks for your interest. > > On Mon, Jun 02, 2014 at 06:37:48PM -0400, Ian Colle wrote: > > Thanks, Filippos! Very interesting reading. > > > > Are you comfortable enough yet to remove the RAID-1 from your > > architecture and get all that space back? > > Actually, we are not ready to do that yet. There are three major things > to consider. > > First, to be able to get rid of the RAID-1 setup, we need to increase the > replication level to at least 3x. So the space gain is not that great to > begin with. > > Second, this operation can take about a month for our scale according to > our calculations and previous experience. During this period of > increased I/O we might get peaks of performance degradation. Plus, we > currently do not have the necessary hardware available to increase the > replication level before we get rid of the RAID setup. > > Third, we have a few disk failures per month. The RAID-1 setup has > allowed us to seamlessly replace them without any hiccup or even a clue > to the end user that something went wrong. Surely we can rely on RADOS > to avoid any data loss, but if we currently rely on RADOS for recovery > there might be some (minor) performance degradation, especially for the > VM I/O traffic. > That. And in addition you probably never had to do all that song and dance of removing a failed OSD and bringing up a replacement. ^o^ One of the reasons I choose RAIDs as OSDs, especially since the Ceph cluster in question is not local. Christian -- Christian Balzer Network/Systems Engineer chibi-FW+hd8ioUD0@public.gmane.org Global OnLine Japan/Fusion Communications http://www.gol.com/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-06-05 6:59 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-06-02 18:32 Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ; login: Filippos Giannakos
2014-06-02 18:51 ` [ceph-users] " Patrick McGarry
2014-06-02 21:40 ` Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ;login: Robin H. Johnson
2014-06-03 9:12 ` Constantinos Venetsanopoulos
2014-06-02 22:37 ` [ceph-users] Experiences with Ceph at the June'14 issue of USENIX ; login: Ian Colle
[not found] ` <1235448490.9762058.1401748668812.JavaMail.zimbra-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2014-06-04 14:22 ` Filippos Giannakos
2014-06-05 6:59 ` Christian Balzer
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).