Thank you Zheng.
Does that mean that, when using such feature, our data integrity relies now on both data pools' integrity/availability?
We currently use such feature in production for dovecot's index files, so we could store this directory on a pool of SSDs only. The main data pool is made of HDDs and stores the email files themselves.
There ain't too many files created, it's just a few files per email user, and basically one directory per user's mailbox.
Each mailbox has a index file that is updated upon every new email received or moved, deleted, read, etc.
I think in this scenario the overhead may be acceptable for us.
Regards,
Webert Lima
DevOps Engineer at MAV Tecnologia
Belo Horizonte - Brasil
IRC NICK - WebertRLZ
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 9:51 AM Yan, Zheng <ukernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 3:34 AM Webert de Souza Lima
<webert.boss@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> hello,
>
> is there any performance impact on cephfs for using file layouts to bind a specific directory in cephfs to a given pool? Of course, such pool is not the default data pool for this cephfs.
>
For each file, no matter which pool file data are stored, mds alway
create an object in the default data pool. The object in default data
pool is used for storing backtrace. So files stored in non-default
pool have extra overhead on file creation. For large file, the
overhead can be neglect. But for lots of small files, the overhead may
affect performance.
> Regards,
>
> Webert Lima
> DevOps Engineer at MAV Tecnologia
> Belo Horizonte - Brasil
> IRC NICK - WebertRLZ
> _______________________________________________
> 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