+1 to this from 45Drives.
On 2025-02-06 09:12, Matthew Leonard (BLOOMBERG/ 120 PARK) wrote:
Bloomberg is mainly agnostic to the time delay, obviously getting back in alignment with OS releases is ideal.
We cannot overstate our agreement on RPM and bare metal support. We also have no desire or interest in being forced to containers. So we also agree to the other on that matter.
Sent from Bloomberg Professional for iPhone
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Mezzanini <pfmeec@xxxxxxx>
To: chris.palmer@xxxxxxxxx, icepic.dz@xxxxxxxxx, dev@xxxxxxx
CC: ceph-users@xxxxxxx
At: 02/06/25 08:07:58 UTC-05:00
I would like to have it on record that I completely agree with the points Chris (and Janne) made.
--
Paul Mezzanini
Platform Engineer III
Research Computing
Rochester Institute of Technology
________________________________________
From: Chris Palmer <chris.palmer@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2025 11:17 AM
To: Janne Johansson; dev@xxxxxxx
Cc: ceph-users
Subject: Re: Ceph Tentacle release timeline — when?
On 05/02/2025 15:40, Janne Johansson wrote:
We in the Ceph Steering Committee are discussing when we want to
target the Tentacle release for, as we find ourselves in an unusual
scheduling situation:
* Historically, we have targeted our major release in early Spring. I
believe this was initially aligned to the Ubuntu LTS release. (With
cephadm and containerization I'm not sure this is particularly
relevant any more?)
Please do not assume everyone runs ceph in containers so the OS
doesn't matter, we and others run ceph using the supplied rpms and
debs.
Absolutely agree with Janne about containers. We use the Centos 9 Stream
RPMs and have no plans whatever to move to cephadm
containers/orchestration. (Many reasons, but that's a different discussion).
What matters to us is:
* properly tested packaging for the supported distributions,
especially the Category A ones (this is becoming more problematic,
especially in the python area)
* properly tested functionality
* prompt fixing of serious bugs, especially in the latest production
version (we haven't even been able to move to squid yet because of
the balancer pg-iteration bug). I'd love to see all Ceph systems
being able to move easily to the supported releases (n, n-1) so that
so much time isn't wasted on problems with obsolete releases.
Some of the new things in tentacle sound great, but we need to
concentrate on the current basics first. Timescales for the new features
are a much more minor consideration for us.
Ceph is a fantastic product. Let's keep it that way.
Chris
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
