Re: Ceph Future

Massimiliano Cuttini <max@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> · Tue, 23 Jan 2018 19:14:38 +0100



    Il 23/01/2018 16:49,
      ceph@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx ha scritto:

    
    On
      01/23/2018 04:33 PM, Massimiliano Cuttini wrote:
      

      With Ceph you have to install an
        orchestrator 3rd party in order to have a clear picture of what
        is going on.
        

        Which can be ok, but not alway pheasable.
        

      Just as with everything
      

      As said wikipedia, for instance, "Proxmox VE supports local
      storage with LVM group, directory and ZFS, as well as network
      storage types with iSCSI, Fibre Channel, NFS, GlusterFS, CEPH and
      DRBD.[14]"
      

      Maybe fibre channel shall provides a webinterface. Maybe iSCSI
      shall too. Maybe drbd & glusterfs will provides another one.
      

    Well, you are mixing different technologies:

    
    1) ISCSI and FibreChannel are networks comunication protocols.

    They just allow hypervisor to communicate to a SAN/NAS, they itself
    doesn't provide any kind of storage.

    
    2) ZFS, glusterFS, NFS are "network ready" filesystem not a software
    deined SAN/NAS.

    
    3) Ceph, ScaleIO, FreeNAS, HP virtualstore... they all are Software
      Defined storage.

    This means that they setup disks, filesystems and network
    connections in order to be ready to use from client.

    They can be thinked as a "storage kind of orchestrator" by
    theirself.

    
    So only the group 3 is comparable technology.

    In this competition I think that Ceph is the only one can win in the
    long run.

    It's open, it works, it's easy, it's free, it's improving faster
    than others.

    However, right now, it is the only one that miss a decent management
    dashboard.

    This is to me so incomprehensible.
      Ceph is by far a killer app of the market.

      So why just don't kill its latest barriers and get a mass
      adoption?

    
      Or maybe this is not their job.
      

      As you said, "Xen is just an hypervisor", thus you are using
      bare-metal low level tool, just like sane folks would use qemu.
      And yes, low-level tools are .. low level.
      

    XenServer is an hypervisor but it has a truly great management
    dashboard which is XenCenter.

    I guess VMware has it's own and i guess also that it's good.

  
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com