Hi Max, > On Feb 28, 2018, at 10:06 AM, Max Cuttins <max@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > This is true, but having something that just works in order to have minimum compatibility and start to dismiss old disk is something you should think about. > You'll have ages in order to improve and get better performance. But you should allow Users to cut-off old solutions as soon as possible while waiting for a better implementation. I like your thinking, but I wonder why doesn’t a locally-mounted kRBD volume meet this need? It seems easier than iSCSI and I would venture would show twice the performance at least in some cases. ISCSI in ALUA mode may be as close as it gets to scale-out iSCSI in software. It is not bad, but you pay for the extra hops in performance and complexity. So it totally makes sense where kRBD and libRBD are not (yet) available, like WMware and Windows, but not where native drivers are available. And about Xen... patches are accepted in this project — folks who really care should go out and code it. Best-F _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |