2 ms·
It's pretty unfair to compare latency of a local NVMe SSD to over-the-network 3x replicated storage. "It's faster if I do less." [Disclaimer: ex-Inktank employ
by yencabulator 3y ago
It's pretty unfair to compare latency of a local NVMe SSD to over-the-network 3x replicated storage. "It's faster if I do less."
[Disclaimer: ex-Inktank employee]
- louwrentius 3y agoI don’t think it’s unfair, there are applications that still are ok with Ceph latencies: I bet it’s good enough for a ton of things. But not all things.
- e12e 3y agoNo, it's important when planning - eg: one big database cluster that provides db-as-a-service (but maybe needs some dedicated ops resources) vs smaller DBs with virtualized storage on ceph (ops resources for ceph cluster and vm tools like k8s). If the latter is too slow for your typical usage...
- yencabulator 3y agoOh, don't get me wrong, you will pay a price for disaggregated highly available storage, and you might need to evaluate whether you want to pay that price or not. But those are two very different worlds, and only one of them gives you elastic disk size, replication, scale-out throughput, and so on. GP makes Ceph sounds worse than it is, when reality is that just shoving all your reads & writes over the network, writes multiple times because of replication, is gonna cost you no matter what tech you build that with.