Thanks for your input Mike, a couple of questions if I may 1. Are you saying that this rbd backing store is not in mainline and is only in SUSE kernels? Ie can I use this lrbd on Debian/Ubuntu/CentOS? 2. Does this have any positive effect on the abort/reset death loop a number of us were seeing when using LIO+krbd and ESXi? 3. Can you still use something like bcache over the krbd? > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Christie [mailto:mchristi@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: 19 January 2016 21:34 > To: Василий Ангапов <angapov@xxxxxxxxx>; Ilya Dryomov > <idryomov@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Nick Fisk <nick@xxxxxxxxxx>; Tyler Bishop > <tyler.bishop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Dominik Zalewski > <dzalewski@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; ceph-users <ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: CentOS 7 iscsi gateway using lrbd > > Everyone is right - sort of :) > > It is that target_core_rbd module that I made that was rejected upstream, > along with modifications from SUSE which added persistent reservations > support. I also made some modifications to rbd so target_core_rbd and krbd > could share code. target_core_rbd uses rbd like a lib. And it is also > modifications to the targetcli related tool and libs, so you can use them to > control the new rbd backend. SUSE's lrbd then handles setup/management > of across multiple targets/gatways. > > I was going to modify targetcli more and have the user just pass in the rbd > info there, but did not get finished. That is why in that suse stuff you still > make the krbd device like normal. You then pass that to the target_core_rbd > module with targetcli and that is how that module knows about the rbd > device. > > The target_core_rbd module was rejected upstream, so I stopped > development and am working on the approach suggested by those > reviewers which instead of going from lio->target_core_rbd->krbd goes > lio->target_core_iblock->linux block layer->krbd. With this approach you > just use the normal old iblock driver and krbd and then I am modifying them > to just work and do the right thing. > > > On 01/19/2016 05:45 AM, Василий Ангапов wrote: > > So is it a different approach that was used here by Mike Christie: > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/target-devel/msg10330.html ? > > It seems to be a confusion because it also implements target_core_rbd > > module. Or not? > > > > 2016-01-19 18:01 GMT+08:00 Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@xxxxxxxxx>: > >> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Nick Fisk <nick@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> But interestingly enough, if you look down to where they run the > targetcli ls, it shows a RBD backing store. > >>> > >>> Maybe it's using the krbd driver to actually do the Ceph side of the > communication, but lio plugs into this rather than just talking to a dumb block > device??? > >> > >> It does use krbd driver. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Ilya _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |