On Thu, 2025-04-17 at 14:17 +0000, Ewen Chan wrote: > Gagan: > > Throwing my $0.02 in -- > > It depends on the system environment of how you are planning on > deploying Gluster (and/or Ceph). > > I have Ceph running on my three node HA Proxmox cluster using three > OASLOA Mini PCs that only has the Intel N95 Processor (4-core/4- > thread) with 16 GB of RAM and a cheap Microcenter store brand 512 GB > NVMe M.2 2230 SSD and my Ceph cluster has been running without any > issues. > > As someone else mentioned, to state or claim that Ceph is "hardware > demanding" isn't wholly accurate. > > As for management, you can install the ceph-mgr-dashboard package > (there is a video that apalrd's adventures put together on YouTube > which goes over the installation process for this package, if you're > running Debian and/or Proxmox (which runs on top of Debian anyways).) > > From there, you can use said Ceph manager dashboard to do everything > else, so that you don't have to deploy Ceph via the CLI. > > I was able to create my erasure coded CRUSH rules using the > dashboard, and then create my RBD pool and also my CephFS pool as > well. (The metadata needs a replicate CRUSH rule, but the data itself > can use erasure coded CRUSH rule.) > > If your environment is such that you can do this, then Ceph might be > a better option for you. > > If you look at the benchmarks that tech YouTuber ElectronicsWizardry > ran, ZFS is actually not all that performant. But what ZFS is good > for are some of the other features like snapshots, replications, and > it's copy-on-write schema for modifying files (which again, based on > the testing that ElectronicsWizardry ran, does indeed create a write > amplification effect as a result of the copy-on-write architecture)
And just adding to this- in case you didn't know- that Ceph also has support for both snapshots and replication. /K > > Conversely, if you're looking for reliability, the more nodes that > you have in the Ceph cluster, the more reliable and resilient to > failures the Ceph backend will be. > > Thanks. > > Sincerely, > Ewen > ________________________________ > From: Gluster-users <gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org> on behalf of > gagan tiwari <gagan.tiw...@mathisys-india.com> > Sent: April 17, 2025 2:14 AM > To: Alexander Schreiber <a...@thangorodrim.ch> > Cc: gluster-users@gluster.org <gluster-users@gluster.org> > Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Gluster with ZFS > > HI Alexander, > Thanks for the update. Initially, I > also thought of deploying Ceph but ceph is quite difficult to set-up > and manage. Moreover, it's also hardware demanding. I think it's > most suitable for a very large set-up with hundreds of clients. > > What do you think of MooseFS ? Have you or anyone else tried > MooseFS. If yes, how was its performance? > > Thanks, > Gagan > > > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 1:45 PM Alexander Schreiber > <a...@thangorodrim.ch<mailto:a...@thangorodrim.ch>> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 09:40:08AM +0530, gagan tiwari wrote: > > Hi Guys, > > We have been using OpenZFS in our HPC environment > > for > > quite some time. And OpenZFS was going fine. > > > > But we are now running into scalability issues since OpenZFS can't > > be > > scaled out. > > Since ZFS is a local FS, you are essentially limited to how much > storage > you can stick into one machine, yes. > > > So, I am planning to use Gluster on top of OpenZFS. > > I don't think that is giving you the kind of long term scalability > you might expect. > > > So, I wanted to know if anyone has tried it. if yes, how it was and > > any > > deployment guide for it. > > I'm running GlusterFS in a small cluster for backup storage. > > > We have an HPC environment . Data security and extremely fast read > > performance is very important for us. > > > > So, please advise. > > For that use case I would actually recommend Ceph over GlusterFS, > since > that can be pretty easily scaled out to very large setups, e.g. CERN > is > using multiple Ceph clusters sized at several PB and their use cases > usually include very fast I/O. > > Another concern is that Ceph is being quite actively developed > whereas > GlusterFS development seems to have slowed down to ... not much, > these days. > > Kind regards, > Alex. > -- > "Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in > overalls and > looks like work." -- Thomas A. > Edison > ________ > > > > Community Meeting Calendar: > > Schedule - > Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 14:30 IST / 09:00 UTC > Bridge: https://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk > Gluster-users mailing list > Gluster-users@gluster.org > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
________ Community Meeting Calendar: Schedule - Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 14:30 IST / 09:00 UTC Bridge: https://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@gluster.org https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
