> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wido den Hollander [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: 14 February 2017 16:25
> To: Dongsheng Yang <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [ceph-users] bcache vs flashcache vs cache tiering
> 
> 
> > Op 14 februari 2017 om 11:14 schreef Nick Fisk <[email protected]>:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ceph-users [mailto:[email protected]] On
> > > Behalf Of Dongsheng Yang
> > > Sent: 14 February 2017 09:01
> > > To: Sage Weil <[email protected]>
> > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
> > > Subject: [ceph-users] bcache vs flashcache vs cache tiering
> > >
> > > Hi Sage and all,
> > >      We are going to use SSDs for cache in ceph. But I am not sure
> > > which one is the best solution, bcache? flashcache? or cache
> > tier?
> >
> > I would vote for cache tier. Being able to manage it from within Ceph,
> > instead of having to manage X number of bcache/flashcache instances,
> > appeals to me more. Also last time I looked Flashcache seems
> > unmaintained and bcache might be going that way with talk of this new
> > bcachefs. Another point to consider is that Ceph has had a lot of work done 
> > on it to ensure data consistency; I don't ever want to be
> in a position where I'm trying to diagnose problems that might be being 
> caused by another layer sitting in-between Ceph and the Disk.
> >
> > However, I know several people on here are using bcache and
> > potentially getting better performance than with cache tiering, so 
> > hopefully someone will give their views.
> 
> I am using Bcache on various systems and it performs really well. The caching 
> layer in Ceph is slow. Promoting Objects is slow and it
> also involves additional RADOS lookups.
> 
> The benefit with bcache is that it's handled by the OS locally, see it being 
> a extension of the page cache.
> 
> A Fast NVM-e device of 1 to 2TB can vastly improve the performance of a bunch 
> of spinning disks. What I've seen is that overall the
> I/O pattern on the disks stabilizes and has less spikes.
> 
> Frequent reads will be cached in the page cache and less frequent by bcache.
> 
> Running this with a few clients now for over 18 months and no issues so far.
> 
> Starting from kernel 4.11 you can also create partitions on bcache devices 
> which makes it very easy to use bcache with ceph-disk and
> thus FileStore and BlueStore.

Thanks for the input Wido. 

So I assume you currently run with the Journals on separate raw SSD partitions, 
but post 4.11 you will allow ceph-disk to partition a single bcache device for 
both data and journal?

Have you seen any quirks with bcache over the time you have been using it? I 
know when I 1st looked at it for non-ceph use a few years back it had a few 
gremlins hidden in it.

Nick

> 
> Wido
> 
> >
> > >
> > > I found there are some CAUTION in ceph.com about cache tiering. Is cache 
> > > tiering is already production ready? especially for rbd.
> >
> > Several people have been using it in production and with Jewel I would
> > say it's stable. There were a few gotcha's in previous releases, but
> > they all appear to be fixed in Jewel. The main reasons for the
> > warnings now are that unless you have a cacheable workload,
> > performance can actually be degraded. If you can predict that say 10%
> > of your data will be hot and provision enough SSD capacity for this
> > hot data, then it should work really well. If you data will be
> > uniformly random or sequential in nature, then I would steer clear,
> > but this applies to most caching solutions albeit with maybe more
> > graceful degradation
> >
> > >
> > > thanx in advance.
> > > Yang
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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

Reply via email to