[Gluster-users] Gluster -> Ceph

Alvin Starr alvin at netvel.net
Thu Dec 14 14:57:00 UTC 2023

On 2023-12-14 07:48, Marcus Pedersén wrote:
> Hi all,
> I am looking in to ceph and cephfs and in my
> head I am comparing with gluster.
> The way I have been running gluster over the years
> is either a replicated or replicated-distributed clusters.
Here are my observations but I am far from an expert in either Ceph or 

Gluster works very well with 2 servers containing 2 big RAID disk arrays.

Ceph on the other hand has MON,MGR,MDS...  that can run on multiple 
servers, and should be for redundancy, but the OSDs should be lots of 
small servers with very few disks attached.

It kind of seems that the perfect OSD would be a disk with a raspberry 
pi attached and a 2.5Gb nic.
Something really cheap and replaceable.

So putting Ceph on 2 big servers with RAID arrays is likely a very bad idea.

I am hoping that someone picks up Gluster because it fits the storage 
requirements for organizations who start measuring their storage in TB 
as opposed to EB.

> The small setup we have had has been a replicated cluster
> with one arbiter and two fileservers.
> These fileservers has been configured with RAID6 and
> that raid has been used as the brick.
> If disaster strikes and one fileserver burns up
> there is still the other fileserver and as it is RAIDed
> I can loose two disks on this machine before I
> start to loose data.
> .... thinking ceph and similar setup ....
> The idea is to have one "admin" node and two fileservers.
> The admin node will run mon, mgr and mds.
> The storage nodes will run mon, mgr, mds and 8x osd (8 disks),
> with replication = 2.
> The problem is that I can not get my head around how
> to think when disaster strikes.
> So one fileserver burns up, there is still the other
> fileserver and from my understanding the ceph system
> will start to replicate the files on the same fileserver
> and when this is done disks can be lost on this server
> without loosing data.
> But to be able to have this security on hardware it
> means that the ceph cluster can never be more then 50% full
> or this will not work, right?
> ... and it becomes similar if we have three fileservers,
> then the cluster can never be more then 2/3 full?
> I am not sure if I missunderstand how ceph works or
> that ceph works bad on smaller systems like this?
> I would appreciate if somebody with better knowledge
> would be able to help me out with this!
> Many thanks in advance!!
> Marcus
> ---
> När du skickar e-post till SLU så innebär detta att SLU behandlar dina personuppgifter. För att läsa mer om hur detta går till, klicka här <https://www.slu.se/om-slu/kontakta-slu/personuppgifter/>
> E-mailing SLU will result in SLU processing your personal data. For more information on how this is done, click here <https://www.slu.se/en/about-slu/contact-slu/personal-data/>
> ________
> 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 at gluster.org
> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Alvin Starr                   ||   land:  (647)478-6285
Netvel Inc.                   ||   Cell:  (416)806-0133
alvin at netvel.net              ||

More information about the Gluster-users mailing list