From: Gionatan Danti <email@example.com> To: LVM general discussion and development <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: "Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk" <email@example.com>, Håkon <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Looking ahead - tiering with LVM? Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2020 13:47:15 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <79061390.1069833.1599071934227.JavaMail.firstname.lastname@example.org> Il 2020-09-02 20:38 Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk ha scritto: > Hi all > > I just wonder how it could be possible some day, some year, to make > lvm use tiering. I guess this has been debated numerous times before > and I found this lvmts project, but it hasn't been updated for eight > years or so. Hi, having developed and supported file-level form of tiered storage in response to a specific customer request, I have the feeling that tiered storage (both file and block based) is not so useful as it seems. Let me explain why I feel so... The key difference between caching and tiering is that the former does not increase total available space, while the latter provides as much space as available in each storage tier. For example, 1 TB SSD + 10 TB HDD can be combined for a 11 TB tiered volume. Tiering is useful when the faster volume provides a significant portion of the total aggregated sum - which is often not the case. In the example above, the SSD only provides a 10% space increase over plain caching. You can argue that one can simple enlarge the performane tier, for example using a 4 TB SSD + 10 TB HDD, but you are now in the ballpark of affording a full-SSD volume - ditching *both* tiering and caching. That said, LVM already provides the basic building block to provide tiering as you can pvmove between block devices. The difficult thing is how to determine which block to move, and managing them in an automated way. Regards. -- Danti Gionatan Supporto Tecnico Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it email: email@example.com - firstname.lastname@example.org GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-05 11:47 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-09-02 18:38 Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk 2020-09-05 11:47 ` Gionatan Danti [this message] 2020-09-09 15:01 ` Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk 2020-09-09 18:16 ` Gionatan Danti 2020-09-09 18:47 ` John Stoffel 2020-09-09 19:10 ` Zdenek Kabelac 2020-09-09 19:21 ` John Stoffel 2020-09-09 19:44 ` Gionatan Danti 2020-09-09 19:53 ` John Stoffel 2020-09-09 20:20 ` Gionatan Danti 2020-09-09 19:41 ` Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk 2020-09-09 19:49 ` Gionatan Danti
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --subject='Re: [linux-lvm] Looking ahead - tiering with LVM?' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).