There is
http://www.sebastien-han.fr/blog/2014/10/10/ceph-how-to-test-if-your-ssd-is-suitable-as-a-journal-device/

On the other hand, I'm not sure if SSD vendors would be happy to see their
device listed performing total crap (for Journaling) ...but yes, I vote for
having some oficial page if possible !

On 7 September 2015 at 11:12, Eino Tuominen <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Should we (somebody, please?) gather up a comprehensive list of suitable
> SSD devices to use as ceph journals? This seems to be a FAQ, and it would
> be nice if all the knowledge and user experiences from several different
> threads could be referenced easily in the future. I took a look at
> wiki.ceph.org and there was nothing on this.
>
> --
>   Eino Tuominen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ceph-users [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
> Jan Schermer
> Sent: 7. syyskuuta 2015 11:44
> To: Christian Balzer
> Cc: ceph-users; Межов Игорь Александрович
> Subject: Re: [ceph-users] which SSD / experiences with Samsung 843T vs.
> Intel s3700
>
> Re: Samsungs - I feel some of you are mixing and confusing different
> Samsung drives.
>
> There is a DC line of Samsung drives meant for DataCenter use. Those have
> EVO (write once read many) and PRO (write mostly) variants.
> You don't want to go anywhere near the EVO line with Ceph.
> Then there are "regular" EVO and PRO drives - they are not meant for
> server use so don't use them.
>
> The main difference is that the "DC" line should provide reliable and
> stable performance over time, no surprises, while the desktop drives can
> just pause and perform garbage collection and have completely different
> cache setup. If you torture desktop drive hard enough it will protect
> itself (slow down to a crawl).
>
> So the only usable drivess for us are "DC PRO" and nothing else.
>
> Jan
>
> > On 05 Sep 2015, at 04:36, Christian Balzer <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 22:37:06 +0000 Межов Игорь Александрович wrote:
> >
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >>
> >> Have worked with Intel DC S3700 200Gb. Due to budget restrictions, one
> >>
> >> ssd hosts a system volume and 1:12 OSD journals. 6 nodes, 120Tb raw
> >> space.
> >>
> > Meaning you're limited to 360MB/s writes per node at best.
> > But yes, I do understand budget constraints. ^o^
> >
> >> Cluster serves as RBD storage for ~100VM.
> >>
> >>
> >> Not a  single failure per year - all devices are healthy.
> >>
> >> The remainig resource (by smart) is ~92%.
> >>
> > I use 1:2 or 1:3 journals and haven't made any dent into my 200GB S3700
> > yet.
> >
> >>
> >> Now we're try to use DC S3710 for journals.
> >
> > As I wrote a few days ago, unless you go for the 400GB version the the
> > 200GB S3710 is actually slower (for journal purposes) than the 3700, as
> > sequential write speed is the key factor here.
> >
> > Christian
> > --
> > Christian Balzer        Network/Systems Engineer
> > [email protected]         Global OnLine Japan/Fusion Communications
> > http://www.gol.com/
> > _______________________________________________
> > ceph-users mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
>



-- 

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

Reply via email to