Hi guys,

I'm interesting in the question, which setup will be faster:

  a) a pool with journals on separate SSD's, OSD's on normal disks OR
  b) a caching pool with SSDs only (osd+journal) in front 
     of a normal pool (osd+journal on normal disks)

A normal setup could be like this:
- 5-node firefly ceph-cluster, 6x spinner OSD and 2x SSD OSD each node.
- all pools have 3 replicates, no Erasure encoding.

Let's assume, 
- Ethernet and SSDs are not the bottleneck (e.g. 10GBit Ethernet and fast SSDs)
- the SSD caching pool must be flushed as soon as possible (always <80% usage)
- the caching pool size is big enough (e.g. 10% of normal pool) to handle the 
  existing workload.

Existing workload could mean
1) to have sometime peak load on a bunch of KVM's 
   (e.g. Database operations and file copy operations)
2) running fio benchmark against a rbd device (which is smaller than the 
caching pool).

Maybe somebody can tell me his 2 cents opinion what's the faster/better 
solution? a) or b)

best regards
  Daniel

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to