What I am getting at is that instead of sinking a bunch of time into this bandaid, why not sink that time into a hypervisor migration. Seems well timed if you ask me.
There are even tools to make that migration easier
You should ultimately move your hypervisor instead of building a one off case for ceph. Ceph works really well if you stay inside the box. So does KVM. They work like Gang Buster's together.
I know that doesn't really answer your OP, but this is what I would do.
~D
On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 7:56 PM Brady Deetz <bdeetz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
We have over 150 VMs running in vmware. We also have 2PB of Ceph for filesystem. With our vmware storage aging and not providing the IOPs we need, we are considering and hoping to use ceph. Ultimately, yes we will move to KVM, but in the short term, we probably need to stay on VMware.On Dec 9, 2017 6:26 PM, "Donny Davis" <donny@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Just curious but why not just use a hypervisor with rbd support? Are there VMware specific features you are reliant on?On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 4:08 PM Brady Deetz <bdeetz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:I'm testing using RBD as VMWare datastores. I'm currently testing with krbd+LVM on a tgt target hosted on a hypervisor._______________________________________________My Ceph cluster is HDD backed.In order to help with write latency, I added an SSD drive to my hypervisor and made it a writeback cache for the rbd via LVM. So far I've managed to smooth out my 4k write latency and have some pleasing results.Architecturally, my current plan is to deploy an iSCSI gateway on each hypervisor hosting that hypervisor's own datastore.Does anybody have any experience with this kind of configuration, especially with regard to LVM writeback caching combined with RBD?
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
