On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 7:10 PM, huang jun <[email protected]> wrote: > I have an idea, why not use radosgw+fs to balance the workload? > but i can not successfully deploy it. > I really want to know whether radosgw+fs works? > If so, how about the performance between radosgw+fs and radosgw+rados? >
At this point radosgw cannot use arbitrary file system as a backend. This requires a restructuring of the code, though we do have that in mind. The current 'fs' backend for radosgw is obsolete and wouldn't work anyway as the internal interfaces evolved quite a bit since it had been written, mainly to take advantage of rados capabilities that a regular filesystem cannot provide. The plan is to create a new devel library (similar to librados and librbd) that will provide a filesystem-like api. Having radosgw using this library (instead of the current internal access library) will help enabling a fs backend. But, as I said, there's still some work ahead of us. Yehuda -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
