I'v tested it on my home cluster: 8 OSDs (4 nodes by 2x4TB OSDs with Celeron J1900 and 8GB RAM) + 4 cache tier OSDs (2 nodes by 2x250GB SSD OSDs with Atom D2500 and 4GB RAM).
HDD OSDs worked v-v-very slow. And SSD OSDs sometimes stopped working because btrfs couldn't rebalance quickly enough and overfilled its SSDs (100% used space). To return them back to life, I had to perform complicated procedure of freeing some space and rebalancing btrfs tree.
Maybe real production hardware hasn't such a problems with btrfs, but I don't think that production cluster stability must depend on its hardware performance.
пт, 7 авг. 2015 г. в 23:05, Ben Hines <bhines@xxxxxxxxx>:
Howdy,
The Ceph docs still say btrfs is 'experimental' in one section, but
say it's the long term ideal for ceph in the later section. Is this
still accurate with Hammer? Is it mature enough on centos 7.1 for
production use?
(kernel is 3.10.0-229.7.2.el7.x86_64 )
thanks-
-Ben
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
