Hi Sebastien! Am 06.05.21 um 08:51 schrieb Sebastien Han:
Inline: Thanks! ––––––––– Sébastien Han Senior Principal Software Engineer, Storage Architect
"Always give 100%. Unless you're giving blood."
On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 12:29 AM Gregory Farnum <gfarnum@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Highlights from this weeks' CLT meeting:
- Can we deprecate ceph-nano? - Yes; it is no longer maintained. Josh will note as much in the README and archive this and other old repos in the github org. - ceph-adm replaces most use cases since it supports containerization and deployment onto a single host. Team will explore supporting OSDs on loopback devices, which is the main differentiator. Small correction, ceph-nano does not use loopback devices, it runs "ceph-osd --mkfs" on a directory and optionally can take block device if provided.
cephadm is not a 100% replacement for ceph-nano, indeed. My idea was to consolidate things a bit and provide a fully supported alternative.
As gaps I can see:
* cephadm does not have multi-clusters support. It does actually. If you're a bit careful with the bootstrap arguments (like avoding port conflicts), you can have more than a single cluster.
* With cn you can run as many clusters with any Ceph version. Right, we have a dependency on the major Ceph version. * cephadm only runs on Linux, where cn can run on any OS that has a Docker daemon running Accidentally, I had a discussion with someone who was interested in porting cephadm to FreeBSD. But yes, cephadm makes use of systemd.
Otherwise, I'm fine with archiving the repository. However, there is still a lot of interest, I'm frequently getting e-mail about it so we should make it clear that cephadm replaces it. Also, are we ok to lose the audience of non-Linux users? I believe it makes a good portion of the user base.
That's Windows, right?
FYI I just archived https://github.com/ceph/cn-core which goal was to use a Golang based bootstrapper instead of the demo.sh script from ceph-container.
- Discussed the Redmine tracker triage process and considered removing the top-level "Ceph" project from the list of available new ticket destinations. I and others pushed back on this since we need a place to put non-subproject-specific issues, so we agreed that going forward project leads will scrub the top-level Ceph project for new relevant issues during their regular bug scrubs. I took an action item to go through the existing back log and sort it appropriately (though I also think Sage did a bunch this morning).
- We added a COSI repository in the Ceph org for working with RGW. - Pacific v16.2.2 needed release notes review, which it got so the release is out now. - We got a question about new options for the dashboard and other component communication, following on from the CDS sessions. Ernesto will follow up on this.
-Greg _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list -- dev@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@ceph.io
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list -- dev@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@ceph.io