On Wed, 17 May 2017 18:02:06 -0700 Ben Hines wrote: > Well, ceph journals are of course going away with the imminent bluestore. Not really, in many senses. > Are small SSDs still useful for something with Bluestore? > Of course, the WAL and other bits for the rocksdb, read up on it. On top of that is the potential to improve things further with things like bcache. > For speccing out a cluster today that is a many 6+ months away from being > required, which I am going to be doing, i was thinking all-SSD would be the > way to go. (or is all-spinner performant with Bluestore?) Too early to make > that call? > Your call and funeral with regards to all spinners (depending on your needs). Bluestore at the very best of circumstances could double your IOPS, but there are other factors at play and most people who NEED SSD journals now would want something with SSDs in Bluestore as well. If you're planning to actually deploy a (entirely) Bluestore cluster in production with mission critical data before next year, you're a lot braver than me. An early adoption scheme with Bluestore nodes being in their own failure domain (rack) would be the best I could see myself doing in my generic cluster. For the 2 mission critical production clusters, they are (will be) frozen most likely. Christian > -Ben > > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Christian Balzer <chibi@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > On Wed, 17 May 2017 11:28:17 +0200 Eneko Lacunza wrote: > > > > > Hi Nick, > > > > > > El 17/05/17 a las 11:12, Nick Fisk escribió: > > > > There seems to be a shift in enterprise SSD products to larger less > > write intensive products and generally costing more than what > > > > the existing P/S 3600/3700 ranges were. For example the new Intel NVME > > P4600 range seems to start at 2TB. Although I mention Intel > > > > products, this seems to be the general outlook across all > > manufacturers. This presents some problems for acquiring SSD's for Ceph > > > > journal/WAL use if your cluster is largely write only and wouldn't > > benefit from using the extra capacity brought by these SSD's to > > > > use as cache. > > > > > > > > Is anybody in the same situation and is struggling to find good P3700 > > 400G replacements? > > > > > > > We usually build tiny ceph clusters, with 1 gbit network and S3610/S3710 > > > 200GB SSDs for journals. We have been experiencing supply problems for > > > those disks lately, although it seems that 400GB disks are available, at > > > least for now. > > > > > This. Very much THIS. > > > > We're trying to get 200 or 400 or even 800GB DC S3710 or S3610s here > > recently with zero success. > > And I'm believing our vendor for a change that it's not their fault. > > > > What seems to be happening (no official confirmation, but it makes all the > > sense in the world to me) is this: > > > > Intel is trying to switch to 3DNAND (like they did with the 3520s), but > > while not having officially EOL'ed the 3(6/7)10s also allowed the supply > > to run dry. > > > > Which of course is not a smart move, because now people are massively > > forced to look for alternatives and if they work unlikely to come back. > > > > I'm looking at oversized Samsungs (base model equivalent to 3610s) and am > > following this thread for other alternatives. > > > > 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 > > -- 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
 |