Hello,
On Sun, 28 Feb 2016 11:08:05 +1000 Lindsay Mathieson wrote:
> On 28/02/2016 10:23 AM, Shinobu Kinjo wrote:
> > Does the Ceph have ${subject}?
>
> Well ceph 0.67 was codename "Dumpling", and we are well past that, so
> yes I guess ceph has mostly been dedumplified. Which is a shame because
> I love dumplings! Yum!
>
Muwhahahahaha, that was a much needed laugh after the adrenaline rush of
phasing in a cache tier in the wee hours of last night. ^o^
As for the OP (and don't take this too personally):
1. It quite amuses me that a Redhat employee (or so one deduces from your
mail address) goes to the community to ask about Ceph when the answers are
available in-house so to speak (and seemingly quite some behind your
pay-wall) as well as a google search away.
http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/1576
2. Other means to dedup with Ceph have also been considered, to not much
avail:
http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/2015-April/000243.html
Lastly while deduplication would be very nice, there are least a dozen
other features/bug fixes of indefinite higher priority that would need to
go into Ceph to make it a more "enterprise level" product.
On the top of my list is of course the lack of object checksums and
resulting inability of Ceph to recover automatically and safely from scrub
errors. All that redundancy, only for having to play Russian roulette when
comes to fix data corruption.
Christian
--
Christian Balzer Network/Systems Engineer
chibi@xxxxxxx Global OnLine Japan/Rakuten Communications
http://www.gol.com/
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
