If you're operating it in an environment where you need it to be up with multiple 9s or you're losing money, you call Red Hat and pay for a consulting engagemen

If you're operating it in an environment where you need it to be up with multiple 9s or you're losing money, you call Red Hat and pay for a consulting engagement. As an open source piece of software, I think it's significantly harder to keep up with the level of public documentation that MSFT can with some of their products. They'll provide RH certified packages that have been tested in-depth on certain OSes (not Gentoo), provide someone on-site to make sure you're following their best practices around configuration, upgrade process, etc. Ceph is a very complex distributed system and it's very difficult (IMO) to nail down what the best practices are around hardware and resources - it depends almost entirely on the workload, and requirements out of it. If you're operating it solely for sequential RGW workloads, it looks _completely_ different than what you'd want for high performance RBD devices. They do have some documentation online, to the extent that they can: separate networks, 5 MON nodes (to avoid one going down and ruining your day), etc. I just think it's significantly harder given that it's used on such a diverse set of workloads, which is why they are more than happy to sell consulting for this.