On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Sławomir Skowron <szibis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 8:07 PM, Yehuda Sadeh <yehuda@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> RGW is maturing. Beside looking at performance, which highly ties into >> RADOS performance, we'd like to hear whether there are certain pain >> points or future directions that you (you as in the ceph community) >> would like to see us taking. >> >> There are a few directions that we were thinking about: >> >> 1. Extend Object Storage API >> >> Swift and S3 has some features that we don't currently support. We can >> certainly extend our functionality, however, is there any demand for >> more features? E.g., self destructing objects, web site, user logs, >> etc. > > More compatibility with S3 and swift is good. Any specific functional interest? > >> >> 2. Better OpenStack interoperability >> >> Keystone support? Other? >> >> 3. New features >> >> Some examples: >> >> - multitenancy: api for domains and user management >> - snapshots >> - computation front end: upload object, then do some data >> transformation/calculation. >> - simple key-value api >> >> 4. CDMI >> >> Sage brought up the CDMI support question to ceph-devel, and I don't >> remember him getting any response. Is there any intereset in CDMI? >> >> >> 5. Native apache/nginx module or embedded web server >> >> We still need to prove that the web server is a bottleneck, or poses >> scaling issues. Writing a correct native nginx module will require >> turning rgw process model into event driven, which is not going to be >> easy. >> > > nginx module is nice thing. It would be nice to have some concrete numbers as to where apache or nginx with fastcgi holding us back, and how a dedicated module is going to improve that. As a rule of thumb it is a no brainer, but still we want to have a better understanding of the situation before we dive into such a project. > >> 6. Improve garbage collection >> >> Currently rgw generates intent logs for garabage removal that require >> running an external tool later, which is an administrative pain. We >> can implement other solutions (OSD side garbage collection, >> integrating cleanup process into the gateway, etc.) but we need to >> understand the priority. > > crontab can handle this task for now, but in big workload, better if > it's integrated, like scrub, and tuned via conf Yeah. One of the original ideas was to leverage scrubbing for objects expiration (issue #1994). The discussion never converged, as the devil is as always in the details. We can revive that discussion. > >> >> 7. libradosgw >> >> We have had this in mind for some time now. Creating a programming api >> for rgw, not too different from librados and librbd. It'll hopefully >> make code much cleaner. It will allow users to write different front >> ends for the rgw backend, and it will make it easier for users to >> write applications that interact with the backend, e.g., do processing >> on objects that users uploaded, FUSE for rgw without S3 as an >> intermediate, etc. >> >> 8. Administration tools improvement >> >> We can always do better there. >> >> 9. Other ideas? > > - I would like to see a feature that can make replication between > clusters. For start 2 clusters. It's a very good feature, when you > have two datacenters, and repliacation goes via hight speed link, but > aplications at top of clusters does not need to handle this tasks, and > data are consistent. This is a more generic ceph issue. We do need, however, to be able to support multiple clusters in rgw. Opened issue #2460. > > - gracefull upgrade Can you elaborate on that? This is always our intention, we've put some mechanisms in place to help with that, although it is not always possible. > > - reload cluster config without restart daemons - or maybe this exist > right now ?? > I opened issue #2459. Thanks, 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
