On Thu, 5 Jun 2014, Yehuda Sadeh wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Samuel Just <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I am starting to wonder whether using leveldb for the mon is actually
> > introducing an excessive amount unnecessary complexity and
> > non-determinism.  Given that the monitor workload is read mostly,
> > except for failure conditions when it becomes write latency sensitive,
> > might we do better with a strict b-tree style backing db such as
> > berkely db even at the cost of some performance?  It seems like
> > something like that might provide more reliable latency properties.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> 
> Whichever route we're taking it'd be nice if it would have been 
> abstracted more cleanly, and make it pluggable.

The first several patches in the wip-rocksdb branch do this.

sage
--
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

Reply via email to