A containerized environment just makes troubleshooting more difficult, getting access and retrieving details on Ceph processes isn't as straightforward as with a non containerized infrastructure. I am still not convinced that containerizing everything brings any benefits except the collocation of services. On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 6:27 PM Matthew H <matthew.heler@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > There should not be any performance difference between an un-containerized > version and a containerized one. > > The shift to containers makes sense, as this is the general direction that > the industry as a whole is taking. I would suggest giving cephadm a try, > it's relatively straight forward and significantly faster for deployments > then ceph-ansible is. > > ________________________________ > From: Matthew Vernon <mv3@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 12:50 PM > To: ceph-users <ceph-users@xxxxxxx> > Subject: ceph-ansible in Pacific and beyond? > > Hi, > > I caught up with Sage's talk on what to expect in Pacific ( > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVtn53MbxTc ) and there was no mention > of ceph-ansible at all. > > Is it going to continue to be supported? We use it (and uncontainerised > packages) for all our clusters, so I'd be a bit alarmed if it was going > to go away... > > Regards, > > Matthew > > > -- > The Wellcome Sanger Institute is operated by Genome Research > Limited, a charity registered in England with number 1021457 and a > company registered in England with number 2742969, whose registered > office is 215 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BE. > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx > > _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
 |