Hi Sebastien!
Am 06.05.21 um 08:51 schrieb Sebastien Han:
Inline:
Thanks!
–––––––––
Sébastien Han
Senior Principal Software Engineer, Storage Architect
"Always give 100%. Unless you're giving blood."
On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 12:29 AM Gregory Farnum <gfarnum@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi all,
Highlights from this weeks' CLT meeting:
- Can we deprecate ceph-nano?
- Yes; it is no longer maintained. Josh will note as much in the
README and archive this and other old repos in the github org.
- ceph-adm replaces most use cases since it supports
containerization and deployment onto a single host. Team will explore
supporting OSDs on loopback devices, which is the main differentiator.
Small correction, ceph-nano does not use loopback devices, it runs
"ceph-osd --mkfs" on a directory and optionally can take block device
if provided.
cephadm is not a 100% replacement for ceph-nano, indeed. My
idea was to consolidate things a bit and provide a fully supported
alternative.
As gaps I can see:
* cephadm does not have multi-clusters support.
It does actually. If you're a bit careful with the bootstrap arguments (like
avoding port conflicts), you can have more than a single cluster.
* With cn you can run as many clusters with any Ceph version.
Right, we have a dependency on the major Ceph version.
* cephadm only runs on Linux, where cn can run on any OS that has a
Docker daemon running
Accidentally, I had a discussion with someone who was interested in
porting cephadm to FreeBSD. But yes, cephadm makes use of systemd.
Otherwise, I'm fine with archiving the repository. However, there is
still a lot of interest, I'm frequently getting e-mail about it so we
should make it clear that cephadm replaces it.
Also, are we ok to lose the audience of non-Linux users? I believe it
makes a good portion of the user base.
That's Windows, right?
FYI I just archived https://github.com/ceph/cn-core which goal was to
use a Golang based bootstrapper instead of the demo.sh script from
ceph-container.
- Discussed the Redmine tracker triage process and considered removing
the top-level "Ceph" project from the list of available new ticket
destinations. I and others pushed back on this since we need a place
to put non-subproject-specific issues, so we agreed that going forward
project leads will scrub the top-level Ceph project for new relevant
issues during their regular bug scrubs. I took an action item to go
through the existing back log and sort it appropriately (though I also
think Sage did a bunch this morning).
- We added a COSI repository in the Ceph org for working with RGW.
- Pacific v16.2.2 needed release notes review, which it got so the
release is out now.
- We got a question about new options for the dashboard and other
component communication, following on from the CDS sessions. Ernesto
will follow up on this.
-Greg
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@xxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@xxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@xxxxxxx
