Re: Ceph journal - isn't it a bit redundant sometimes?

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

 



> Can you elaborate on that? I don't think there needs to be a difference. Ceph
> is hosting mostly filesystems, so it's all just a bunch of filesystem
> transactions anyway...
> 

There is some additional background information here [1].  The XFS journal protects "atomic" (for lack of a better word) actions that actually require multiple disk writes in implementation.  The Ceph journal acts similarly to ensure that Ceph-level "atomic" actions can be consistently applied to the underlying filesystem in case of failure (e.g. if ceph-osd crashed in the middle of one of these compound "atomic" Ceph metadata updates -- XFS wouldn't know how to get the system back to a consistent state).

As Ilya alluded to, the forthcoming NewStore is able to avoid costly double-writes in certain scenarios such as create, append and overwrite operations by decoupling objects from the underlying filesystem's actual storage path.

[1] https://github.com/ceph/ceph/blob/master/doc/rados/configuration/journal-ref.rst

-- 

Jason Dillaman 
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com



[Index of Archives]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Ceph Development]     [Ceph Large]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux