> -----Original Message----- > From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of > Jan Schermer > Sent: 18 August 2015 10:01 > To: Alex Gorbachev <ag@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Dominik Zalewski <dzalewski@xxxxxxxxxxx>; ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: any recommendation of using EnhanceIO? > > I already evaluated EnhanceIO in combination with CentOS 6 (and > backported 3.10 and 4.0 kernel-lt if I remember correctly). > It worked fine during benchmarks and stress tests, but once we run DB2 on it > it panicked within minutes and took all the data with it (almost literally - files > that werent touched, like OS binaries were b0rked and the filesystem was > unsalvageable). > If you disregard this warning - the performance gains weren't that great > either, at least in a VM. It had problems when flushing to disk after reaching > dirty watermark and the block size has some not-well-documented > implications (not sure now, but I think it only cached IO _larger_than the > block size, so if your database keeps incrementing an XX-byte counter it will > go straight to disk). > > Flashcache doesn't respect barriers (or does it now?) - if that's ok for you > than go for it, it should be stable and I used it in the past in production > without problems. > > bcache seemed to work fine, but I needed to > a) use it for root > b) disable and enable it on the fly (doh) > c) make it non-persisent (flush it) before reboot - not sure if that was > possible either. > d) all that in a customer's VM, and that customer didn't have a strong > technical background to be able to fiddle with it... > So I haven't tested it heavily. > > Bcache should be the obvious choice if you are in control of the environment. > At least you can cry on LKML's shoulder when you lose data :-) Please note, it looks like the main(only?) dev of Bcache has started making a new version of bcache, bcachefs. At this stage I'm not sure what this means for the ongoing support of the existing bcache project. > > Jan > > > > On 18 Aug 2015, at 01:49, Alex Gorbachev <ag@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > What about https://github.com/Frontier314/EnhanceIO? Last commit 2 > > months ago, but no external contributors :( > > > > The nice thing about EnhanceIO is there is no need to change device > > name, unlike bcache, flashcache etc. > > > > Best regards, > > Alex > > > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Daniel Gryniewicz <dang@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > >> I did some (non-ceph) work on these, and concluded that bcache was > >> the best supported, most stable, and fastest. This was ~1 year ago, > >> to take it with a grain of salt, but that's what I would recommend. > >> > >> Daniel > >> > >> > >> ________________________________ > >> From: "Dominik Zalewski" <dzalewski@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> To: "German Anders" <ganders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: "ceph-users" <ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2015 5:28:10 PM > >> Subject: Re: any recommendation of using EnhanceIO? > >> > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I’ve asked same question last weeks or so (just search the mailing > >> list archives for EnhanceIO :) and got some interesting answers. > >> > >> Looks like the project is pretty much dead since it was bought out by > HGST. > >> Even their website has some broken links in regards to EnhanceIO > >> > >> I’m keen to try flashcache or bcache (its been in the mainline kernel > >> for some time) > >> > >> Dominik > >> > >> On 1 Jul 2015, at 21:13, German Anders <ganders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> Hi cephers, > >> > >> Is anyone out there that implement enhanceIO in a production > environment? > >> any recommendation? any perf output to share with the diff between > >> using it and not? > >> > >> Thanks in advance, > >> > >> German > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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
 |