22 Aug
2019
22 Aug
'19
7:42 p.m.
It's certainly possible. It makes things a little more complex though. Some
questions you may want to consider during the design..
- Is the customer aware this won't preserve any data on the luns they are
hoping to reuse.
- Is the plan to eventually replace the SAN with JBOD, in the same systems?
If so you may want to make your luns look like the eventual drive size and
count.
- Is the plan to use a few systems with SAN and add standalone systems
later? Then you need to calculate expected speeds and divide between
failure domains.
- Is the plan to use a couple of hosts with SAN to save money, and have the
rest be traditional Ceph storage? If so consider putting the SAN hosts all
in one failure domain.
- Depending on the SAN you may consider aligning your failure domains to
different arrays, switches, or even array directors.
- Remember to take the hosts network speed into consideration when
calculating how many luns to put on each host.
Hope that helps.
-Brett
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019, 4:14 AM Mohsen Mottaghi <mohsenmottaghi(a)outlook.com>
wrote:
Hi
Yesterday one of our customers asked us a strange request. He asked us to
use SAN as the Ceph storage space to add the SAN storages it currently has
to the cluster and reduce other disk purchase costs.
Anybody know can we do this or not?! And if this is possible how we should
start to architect this Strange Ceph?! Is it good or not?!
Thanks for your help.
Mohsen Mottaghi
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users(a)ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io
22 Aug
22 Aug
7:52 p.m.
New subject: Strange Ceph architect with SAN storages
Just my quick two cents here.
Technically this is possible which doesn't mean it's a good idea. I
wouldn't use such a setup in a productive environment. I don't think
they'll really save a lot and adding the latency etc on top not sure
this is what they're really looking for.
Just for testing and for giving it a try, sure but for the rest I would
go with a clear "no" instead of encouraging them to do that.
Maybe you can tell use more about their use-case? What are they looking
for, how large should this get, access protocols etc.
Kai
On 22.08.19 17:12, Brett Chancellor wrote:
It's certainly possible. It makes things a little
more complex though.
Some questions you may want to consider during the design..
- Is the customer aware this won't preserve any data on the luns they
are hoping to reuse.
- Is the plan to eventually replace the SAN with JBOD, in the same
systems? If so you may want to make your luns look like the eventual
drive size and count.
- Is the plan to use a few systems with SAN and add standalone systems
later? Then you need to calculate expected speeds and divide between
failure domains.
- Is the plan to use a couple of hosts with SAN to save money, and
have the rest be traditional Ceph storage? If so consider putting the
SAN hosts all in one failure domain.
- Depending on the SAN you may consider aligning your failure domains
to different arrays, switches, or even array directors.
- Remember to take the hosts network speed into consideration when
calculating how many luns to put on each host.
Hope that helps.
-Brett
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019, 4:14 AM Mohsen Mottaghi
<mohsenmottaghi(a)outlook.com <mailto:mohsenmottaghi@outlook.com>> wrote:
Hi
Yesterday one of our customers asked us a strange request. He
asked us to use SAN as the Ceph storage space to add the SAN
storages it currently has to the cluster and reduce other disk
purchase costs.
Anybody know can we do this or not?! And if this is possible how
we should start to architect this Strange Ceph?! Is it good or not?!
Thanks for your help.
Mohsen Mottaghi
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users(a)ceph.io
<mailto:ceph-users@ceph.io>
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io
<mailto:ceph-users-leave@ceph.io>
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users(a)ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io
--
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, D 90409 Nürnberg
GF:Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer, (HRB 247165, AG München)
10:39 p.m.
New subject: Strange Ceph architect with SAN storages
In a past life I had a bunch of SAN gear dumped in my lap, it was spec’d by someone else
misintepreting vague specs. It was SAN gear with an AoE driver. I wasn’t using Ceph, but
sending it back and getting a proper solution wasn’t an option. Ended up using SAN gear
as a NAS with a single client, effectively DAS.
It was a nightmare: cabling, monitoring, maintenance.
This could be done, but as Kai says latency would be an issue. One would also need to pay
*very* close attention to mappings and failure domains, there is considerable opportunity
here to shoot oneself in the foot when a component has issues.
Just my quick two cents here.
Technically this is possible which doesn't mean it's a good idea. I wouldn't
use such a setup in a productive environment. I don't think they'll really save a
lot and adding the latency etc on top not sure this is what they're really looking
for.
Just for testing and for giving it a try, sure but for the rest I would go with a clear
"no" instead of encouraging them to do that.
Maybe you can tell use more about their use-case? What are they looking for, how large
should this get, access protocols etc.
Kai
On 22.08.19 17:12, Brett Chancellor wrote:
It's certainly possible. It makes things a
little more complex though. Some questions you may want to consider during the design..
- Is the customer aware this won't preserve any data on the luns they are hoping to
reuse.
- Is the plan to eventually replace the SAN with JBOD, in the same systems? If so you may
want to make your luns look like the eventual drive size and count.
- Is the plan to use a few systems with SAN and add standalone systems later? Then you
need to calculate expected speeds and divide between failure domains.
- Is the plan to use a couple of hosts with SAN to save money, and have the rest be
traditional Ceph storage? If so consider putting the SAN hosts all in one failure domain.
- Depending on the SAN you may consider aligning your failure domains to different
arrays, switches, or even array directors.
- Remember to take the hosts network speed into consideration when calculating how many
luns to put on each host.
Hope that helps.
-Brett
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019, 4:14 AM Mohsen Mottaghi <mohsenmottaghi(a)outlook.com> wrote:
Hi
Yesterday one of our customers asked us a strange request. He asked us to use SAN as the
Ceph storage space to add the SAN storages it currently has to the cluster and reduce
other disk purchase costs.
Anybody know can we do this or not?! And if this is possible how we should start to
architect this Strange Ceph?! Is it good or not?!
Thanks for your help.
Mohsen Mottaghi
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users(a)ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list --
ceph-users(a)ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to
ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io
--
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, D 90409 Nürnberg
GF:Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer, (HRB 247165, AG München)
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users(a)ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io
11:56 p.m.
New subject: Strange Ceph architect with SAN storages
After thinking about this more, you may also consider just adding the SAN
in as a different device class(es). I wouldn't be scared of doing it, but
you will want to paint a picture of this transitional environment, the end
goal, and any steps the customer will need to take to get there. Also,
spend some time thinking through all the different failure scenarios and
how those map to Ceph.
-Brett
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 2:11 PM Anthony D'Atri <aad(a)dreamsnake.net> wrote:
In a past life I had a bunch of SAN gear dumped in my
lap, it was spec’d
by someone else misintepreting vague specs. It was SAN gear with an AoE
driver. I wasn’t using Ceph, but sending it back and getting a proper
solution wasn’t an option. Ended up using SAN gear as a NAS with a single
client, effectively DAS.
It was a nightmare: cabling, monitoring, maintenance.
This could be done, but as Kai says latency would be an issue. One would
also need to pay *very* close attention to mappings and failure domains,
there is considerable opportunity here to shoot oneself in the foot when a
component has issues.
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users(a)ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io
Just my quick two cents here.
Technically this is possible which doesn't mean it's a good idea. I
wouldn't use such a setup in a productive environment. I don't think
they'll really save a lot and adding the latency etc on top not sure this
is what they're really looking for.
Just for testing and for giving it a try, sure but for the rest I would
go with a
clear "no" instead of encouraging them to do that.
Maybe you can tell use more about their use-case? What are they looking
for, how
large should this get, access protocols etc.
Kai
On 22.08.19 17:12, Brett Chancellor wrote:
> It's certainly possible. It makes things a little more complex though.
Some questions you may want to consider during the design..
> - Is the customer aware this won't
preserve any data on the luns they
are hoping to reuse.
> - Is the plan to eventually replace the SAN
with JBOD, in the same
systems? If so you may want to make your luns look like the
eventual drive
size and count.
> - Is the plan to use a few systems with SAN
and add standalone systems
later? Then you need to calculate expected speeds and
divide between
failure domains.
> - Is the plan to use a couple of hosts with
SAN to save money, and have
the rest be traditional Ceph storage? If so consider
putting the SAN hosts
all in one failure domain.
> - Depending on the SAN you may consider
aligning your failure domains
to different arrays, switches, or even array
directors.
> - Remember to take the hosts network speed
into consideration when
calculating how many luns to put on each host.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> -Brett
>
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019, 4:14 AM Mohsen Mottaghi <
mohsenmottaghi(a)outlook.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
>
> Yesterday one of our customers asked us a strange request. He asked us
to use
SAN as the Ceph storage space to add the SAN storages it currently
has to the cluster and reduce other disk purchase costs.
>
>
> Anybody know can we do this or not?! And if this is possible how we
should
start to architect this Strange Ceph?! Is it good or not?!
Thanks for your help.
Mohsen Mottaghi
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users(a)ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list --
ceph-users(a)ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to
ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io
--
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, D 90409 Nürnberg
GF:Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer, (HRB 247165, AG München)
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users(a)ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io 
23 Aug
23 Aug
1:12 p.m.
New subject: Strange Ceph architect with SAN storages
What about getting the disks out of the san enclosure and putting them
in some sas expander? And just hook it up to an existing ceph osd server
via sas/sata jbod adapter with external sas port?
Something like this
https://www.raidmachine.com/products/6g-sas-direct-connect-jbods/
1711
days inactive
1712
days old
4 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Anthony D'Atri -
Brett Chancellor -
Kai Wagner -
Marc Roos