On 5/30/2017 4:19 PM, Ric Wheeler wrote:
On 05/30/2017 06:54 PM, WK wrote:
Why is RedHat not interested in Gluster in OpenStack?
Its obvious from my years lurking on the Openstack Mailing lists that
the OpenStack community is most comfortable with Ceph. When asked
about Gluster, I've seen vague 'complaints' which are mostly no
longer relevant and more likely arise from a lack of familiarity with
modern Gluster.
I've always been a little surprised the RH people didn't correct
that. Instead the OpenStack=Ceph and RHEV=Gluster mindsets seems to
have been ingrained.
-bill
Hi Bill,
Red Hat has both ceph and gluster based products. We know both
technologies really well, not surprising since we employ most of the
developers of both.
Gluster is very relevant and growing, but we definitely see a strong
affinity for ceph in the openstack community. We have invested heavily
in gluster in other areas.
Well, that is what I alluded to in my commentary.
What I was trying to find out was if the decision was based on a
technical aspect in the technologies involved (such as Gluster scaling)
or simply the reality of open source project politics (i.e. cat
herding/familiarity).
It appears to be the latter.
That is fine. The OpenStack project/community is already somewhat <ahem>
"unusual" enough without having to swim upstream against an incumbent
technology.
We ($dayjob) have played with most of the distributed FS/Disk systems
and use at least 3 different ones at the present. Gluster has it role in
our system (mostly VMs in host clusters).
I've always been curious as to what the RedHat position on the Gluster
use case vs Ceph use case was in case we were missing an opportunity.
-bill
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
