From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 22:24:32 -0700 From: Roman Shaposhnik In-reply-to: <140e7ec30907300931v3dbd8ebdl32a6b74792be144@mail.gmail.com> To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Message-id: <28CF259C-21F4-4071-806E-6D5DA02C985D@sun.com> References: <1248914582.479.7837.camel@work.SFBay.Sun.COM> <140e7ec30907300931v3dbd8ebdl32a6b74792be144@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [9fans] ceph Topicbox-Message-UUID: 341dd4d8-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Jul 30, 2009, at 9:31 AM, sqweek wrote: > 2009/7/30 Roman V Shaposhnik : >> This is sort of off-topic, but does anybody have any experience with >> Ceph? >> http://ceph.newdream.net/ >> >> Good or bad war stories (and general thoughts) would be quite >> welcome. > > Not with ceph itself, but the description and terminology they use > remind me a lot of lustre (seems like it's a userspace version) which > we use at work. Does a damn fine job - as long as you get a stable > version. We have run into issues trying out new versions several > times... I guess that sums up my impression of ceph so far: I don't see where it would fit. I think that in HPC it is 99% Lustre, in enterprise it is either CIFS or NFS, etc. There's some internal push for it around here so I was wondering whether I missed a memo once again... Thanks, Roman.