Re: questions about radosgw

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 7:10 PM, huang jun <hjwsm1989@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I have an idea, why not use radosgw+fs to balance the workload?
> but i can not successfully deploy it.
> I really want to know whether radosgw+fs works?
> If so, how about the performance between radosgw+fs and radosgw+rados?
>

At this point radosgw cannot use arbitrary file system as a backend.
This requires a restructuring of the code, though we do have that in
mind. The current 'fs' backend for radosgw is obsolete and wouldn't
work anyway as the internal interfaces evolved quite a bit since it
had been written, mainly to take advantage of rados capabilities that
a regular filesystem cannot provide.
The plan is to create a new devel library (similar to librados and
librbd) that will provide a filesystem-like api. Having radosgw using
this library (instead of the current internal access library) will
help enabling a fs backend. But, as I said, there's still some work
ahead of us.

Yehuda
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [CEPH Users]     [Ceph Large]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux BTRFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux