BLU Discuss list archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Discuss] Thin Provisioned LVM
- Subject: [Discuss] Thin Provisioned LVM
- From: markw at mohawksoft.com (markw at mohawksoft.com)
- Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2015 23:20:02 -0400
- In-reply-to: <BN3PR0401MB12043B3EFFB7E32A28F84159DC190@BN3PR0401MB1204.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
- References: <9add572f6d172df6ae1d292b42ee10b6.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com> <54FF4556.5040107@gmail.com> <dfce4b3cdeafb3342a1b505319cf3683.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com> <55005473.2030908@gmail.com> <2a0abeb4977f9dec804ba8215393e8dd.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com> <55007E04.2030601@gmail.com> <5826ead7c09a9c2debfdaf12db4b173c.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com> <BN3PR0401MB12043B3EFFB7E32A28F84159DC190@BN3PR0401MB1204.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
>> From: Discuss [mailto:discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey.com at blu.org] On >> Behalf Of markw at mohawksoft.com >> >> says give ZFS whole disks, which is stupid. > > Mark, clearly you know nothing about ZFS. Think what you wish. Maybe I'm not explaining the problem.... Commercial SAN systems provide disks as "LUNs" over fibre channel or iSCSI. These LUNs are allocated from a pool of disks in a commercial storage system. Ideally, a number of servers would use storage from the SAN. Each of the servers or VMs will be presented with their disks. Now, EXT2, XFS and many other file systems keep their data allocation conservative, opting to re-use blocks in-place instead of using new blocks. The problem arises when you have something like a 100 VMs, each with a 2TB LUNs, running off a SAN with only 20TB of actual storage. Without ZFS, the systems only use space as they need it. 100VMs with 2TB of logical storage each, can easily come out of 20TB as long as block allocation is conservative. When you use ZFS the 100VMs will, far more quickly than actually needed, gobble up 2TB each and force 200TB physical storage even though most of the VMs have largely free space used by ZFS. This is representative of a *real* and actual problem seen in the field by a real customer. ZFS is not compatible with this strategy, and this strategy is common and not something the VERY LARGE customer is willing to change. > > Also, it's clear you have an axe to grind, which makes anything you say > about it "take it with a grain of salt." Believe what you will, I have posted nothing but real issues that myself and other people have had. > > I've personally used a lot of zfs, and a lot of lvm, and there is barely > any situation that I would ever consider using lvm ever again. Agreed, ZFS does a lot of things "right," unfortunately it does a lot of things incorrectly and renders itself as a sub-optimal for a class of applications, specifically ones which manage their own block cache and block I/O strategy. You can make ZFS "faster," but in the configuration I describe, not as fast as a simpler volume management system. >
- Follow-Ups:
- [Discuss] Thin Provisioned LVM
- From: blu at nedharvey.com (Edward Ned Harvey (blu))
- [Discuss] Thin Provisioned LVM
- References:
- [Discuss] Thin Provisioned LVM
- From: markw at mohawksoft.com (markw at mohawksoft.com)
- [Discuss] Thin Provisioned LVM
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- [Discuss] Thin Provisioned LVM
- From: markw at mohawksoft.com (markw at mohawksoft.com)
- [Discuss] Thin Provisioned LVM
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- [Discuss] Thin Provisioned LVM
- From: markw at mohawksoft.com (markw at mohawksoft.com)
- [Discuss] Thin Provisioned LVM
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- [Discuss] Thin Provisioned LVM
- From: markw at mohawksoft.com (markw at mohawksoft.com)
- [Discuss] Thin Provisioned LVM
- From: blu at nedharvey.com (Edward Ned Harvey (blu))
- [Discuss] Thin Provisioned LVM
- Prev by Date: [Discuss] Thin Provisioned LVM
- Next by Date: [Discuss] Rekonq doesn't trust my Certificate Authority
- Previous by thread: [Discuss] Thin Provisioned LVM
- Next by thread: [Discuss] Thin Provisioned LVM
- Index(es):