Chris's Wiki :: blog/solaris/IllumosVsLinuxZFS Commentshttps://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/solaris/IllumosVsLinuxZFS?atomcommentsDWiki2013-10-16T16:26:03ZRecent comments in Chris's Wiki :: blog/solaris/IllumosVsLinuxZFS.By Chris Siebenmann on /blog/solaris/IllumosVsLinuxZFStag:CSpace:blog/solaris/IllumosVsLinuxZFS:42bbe1f41b63dae60b52e519bc376200c58d431bChris Siebenmann<div class="wikitext"><p>Department of very slow replies: I finally wrote up my thoughts about
why Ceph is not something we're going to look at in
<a href="https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/tech/DismissingISCSIAlternatives">DismissingISCSIAlternatives</a>.</p>
</div>2013-10-16T16:26:03ZFrom 203.33.246.36 on /blog/solaris/IllumosVsLinuxZFStag:CSpace:blog/solaris/IllumosVsLinuxZFS:f3a70aafea5210ace530a45823e5230b9b248e25From 203.33.246.36<div class="wikitext"><p>On Ceph and Kerberos. The cephx can be turned off and the file system which you would re-export via NFS would not need extra authentication.</p>
<p>Is that the only issue ? If so it would seem to me that Ceph would be the perfect solution. Commodity hardware, 100% open source, good online supported, commercial support available, scale sideways for performance and highly flexible with how a it can be accessed.</p>
</div>2013-06-26T05:16:37ZBy Chris Siebenmann on /blog/solaris/IllumosVsLinuxZFStag:CSpace:blog/solaris/IllumosVsLinuxZFS:e538e6269817901d0b758d3c64e837250f7d228dChris Siebenmann<div class="wikitext"><p>I've now looked at Ceph a bit and it's clearly not suitable for
us because it requires strong user authentication (currently
Kerberos). Strong user authentication is <a href="https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/unix/DFSSetuidIncompatibility">completely incompatible</a> with our current overall environment
and with many things that our users want to do.</p>
</div>2013-06-25T15:02:31ZBy Chris Siebenmann on /blog/solaris/IllumosVsLinuxZFStag:CSpace:blog/solaris/IllumosVsLinuxZFS:6126bc12f04a5dc6acada231890d7b2b75e17a8cChris Siebenmann<div class="wikitext"><p>I looked at FreeBSD but sadly it turned out that the iSCSI client was
<a href="https://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/unix/FreeBSDiSCSIClientNoGo">not at ready for production use</a>.
There is apparently some hopes that that will change sometime, but
right now it is clearly unsuitable for us.</p>
</div>2013-06-25T14:12:03ZFrom 75.119.235.101 on /blog/solaris/IllumosVsLinuxZFStag:CSpace:blog/solaris/IllumosVsLinuxZFS:676b737a7ceeeb99ce361f55b67b7fb6bb2c2f3fFrom 75.119.235.101<div class="wikitext"><p>I'm surprised FreeBSD isn't in the running. In my (admittedly limited) experience, its ZFS implementation is far more than adequate, and I have no doubt it will be supported for some time.</p>
<p>(iSCSI performance wasn't great, though; I suspect that problem was solvable, but I never had a chance to look into it properly.)</p>
<p>--erlogan</p>
</div>2013-06-25T13:52:05ZFrom 203.33.246.36 on /blog/solaris/IllumosVsLinuxZFStag:CSpace:blog/solaris/IllumosVsLinuxZFS:db35ccdc78f647468ba9ddaaec1c50431272cdb1From 203.33.246.36<div class="wikitext"><p>Hi Chris</p>
<p>I've been watching your blog a long time, but I do not remember all the requirements you have mentioned in the past for the Uni's storage.</p>
<p>But have you considered using something totally different ?</p>
<p>One system I've been watching is Ceph (ceph.com). It supports block access, S3 style, and a file system.</p>
<p>I ran up a set of VM's as test and was impressed.</p>
<p>Have a read and tell use what your think. </p>
<p>Mike</p>
</div>2013-06-25T07:01:55Z