Hi,
I guess what you are suggesting is something like k+m with m>=k+2, for example k=4, m=6. Then, one can distribute 5 shards per DC and sustain the loss of an entire DC while still having full access to redundant storage.
that's exactly what I mean, yes.
Now, a long time ago I was in a lecture about error-correcting codes (Reed-Solomon codes). From what I remember, the computational complexity of these codes explodes at least exponentially with m. Out of curiosity, how does m>3 perform in practice? What's the CPU requirement per OSD?
Such a setup usually would be considered for archiving purposes so the performance requirements aren't very high, but so far we haven't heard any complaints performance-wise. I don't have details on CPU requirements at hand right now. Regards, Eugen Zitat von Frank Schilder <frans@dtu.dk>:
Dear Eugen,
I guess what you are suggesting is something like k+m with m>=k+2, for example k=4, m=6. Then, one can distribute 5 shards per DC and sustain the loss of an entire DC while still having full access to redundant storage.
Now, a long time ago I was in a lecture about error-correcting codes (Reed-Solomon codes). From what I remember, the computational complexity of these codes explodes at least exponentially with m. Out of curiosity, how does m>3 perform in practice? What's the CPU requirement per OSD?
Best regards,
================= Frank Schilder AIT Risø Campus Bygning 109, rum S14
________________________________________ From: Eugen Block <eblock@nde.ag> Sent: 27 March 2020 08:33:45 To: ceph-users@ceph.io Subject: [ceph-users] Re: Combining erasure coding and replication?
Hi Brett,
Our concern with Ceph is the cost of having three replicas. Storage may be cheap but I’d rather not buy ANOTHER 5pb for a third replica if there are ways to do this more efficiently. Site-level redundancy is important to us so we can’t simply create an erasure-coded volume across two buildings – if we lose power to a building, the entire array would become unavailable.
can you elaborate on that? Why is EC not an option? We have installed several clusters with two datacenters resilient to losing a whole dc (and additional disks if required). So it's basically the choice of the right EC profile. Or did I misunderstand something?
Zitat von Brett Randall <brett.randall@gmail.com>:
Hi all
Had a fun time trying to join this list, hopefully you don’t get this message 3 times!
On to Ceph… We are looking at setting up our first ever Ceph cluster to replace Gluster as our media asset storage and production system. The Ceph cluster will have 5pb of usable storage. Whether we use it as object-storage, or put CephFS in front of it, is still TBD.
Obviously we’re keen to protect this data well. Our current Gluster setup utilises RAID-6 on each of the nodes and then we have a single replica of each brick. The Gluster bricks are split between buildings so that the replica is guaranteed to be in another premises. By doing it this way, we guarantee that we can have a decent number of disk or node failures (even an entire building) before we lose both connectivity and data.
Our concern with Ceph is the cost of having three replicas. Storage may be cheap but I’d rather not buy ANOTHER 5pb for a third replica if there are ways to do this more efficiently. Site-level redundancy is important to us so we can’t simply create an erasure-coded volume across two buildings – if we lose power to a building, the entire array would become unavailable. Likewise, we can’t simply have a single replica – our fault tolerance would drop way down on what it is right now.
Is there a way to use both erasure coding AND replication at the same time in Ceph to mimic the architecture we currently have in Gluster? I know we COULD just create RAID6 volumes on each node and use the entire volume as a single OSD, but that this is not the recommended way to use Ceph. So is there some other way?
Apologies if this is a nonsensical question, I’m still trying to wrap my head around Ceph, CRUSH maps, placement rules, volume types, etc etc!
TIA
Brett
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@ceph.io
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@ceph.io