AFAIK when using XFS, parallel write as you described is not enabled.
Regardless in a way though the NVMe drives are so fast it shouldn't matter much the partitioned journal or other choice.
What I would be more interested in is you replication size on the cache pool.
This might sound crazy but if your KVM instances are really that short lived, could you get away with size=2 on the cache pool from and availability perspective ?
Regardless in a way though the NVMe drives are so fast it shouldn't matter much the partitioned journal or other choice.
What I would be more interested in is you replication size on the cache pool.
This might sound crazy but if your KVM instances are really that short lived, could you get away with size=2 on the cache pool from and availability perspective ?
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 7:44 AM Sascha Vogt <sascha.vogt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Wade,
Am 03.02.2016 um 13:26 schrieb Wade Holler:
> What is your file system type, XFS or Btrfs ?
We're using XFS, though for the new cache tier we could also switch to
btrfs if that suggest a significant performance improvement...
Greetings
-Sascha-
_______________________________________________
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
