> > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AXj9h0yDc2ztFWuptqcTrNU2Ui3wMyAn > 6QUft3CPdcc/edit?usp=sharing > > > The gist of it is that on the read path, crimson+cyanstore is > significantly more efficient than crimson+alienstore and any classic > setup. We are slower in terms of absolute performance, but that's > expected to be the case until the multi-reactor work is done. The > thinking right now is that we probably have some optimization we can do > alienstore and of course bluestore as well (We have ongoing work > there). On the write path things are a little murkier. Cyanstore for > some reason is more efficient with very small and very large datasets > but not the middle size case. alienstore/bluestore and classic memstore > efficiency seems to drop overall as the dataset size grows. In fact > classic memstore is significantly less efficient on the write path than > bluestore is and this isn't the first dataset to show this. > Sorry for maybe asking out of scope, but I am curious. I think I tried asking once on such video conference one can join. But how is this new crimson osd being developed? - Are you designing/developing this completely in-house? - Are you cooperating with some university (or other external party) that discovered some new technology? - Are you sharing knowledge with other software defined storage solutions? - How much % of the work on crimson would you characterize as own innovation and how % as applying already available technology? _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
 |