Re: Comments on Ceph distributed parity implementation

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

 



Paul Von-Stamwitz <PVonStamwitz <at> us.fujitsu.com> writes:

Hi Paul, 

> 
> Loic, I know nothing about Mojette Transforms. From what little I gleaned, 
it might be good for repair
> (needing only a subset of chunks within a range to recalculate a missing 
chunk) but I'm worried about the
> storage efficiency. RozoFS claims 1.5x. I'd like to do better than that.
> 
> All the best,
> Paul
> 

If you want to do better than that you will probably lose in availability. 
1.5x give the same availability than 3 replicats and that for any kind of 
erasure coding.
FYI, Mojette transform has no constraint in terms of Galois fields. It is the 
big advantage to use discrete geometry rather than algebra.

best regards,
bp



--
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