From: Gionatan Danti <g.danti@assyoma.it>
To: LVM general discussion and development <linux-lvm@redhat.com>
Cc: "Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk" <roy@karlsbakk.net>, Håkon <hawken@thehawken.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Looking ahead - tiering with LVM?
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2020 21:49:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <daf74778e6b44904e6a07a4e38c8c03a@assyoma.it> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <695805084.5038574.1599680480630.JavaMail.zimbra@karlsbakk.net>
Il 2020-09-09 21:41 Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk ha scritto:
>>> First, filelevel is usually useless. Say you have 50 VMs with Windows
>>> server something. A lot of them are bound to have a ton of equal
>>> If you look at IOPS instead of just sequencial speed, you'll see the
>>> difference. A set of 10 drives in a RAID-6 will perhaps, maybe, give
>>> you 1kIOPS, while a single SSD might give you 50kIOPS or even more.
>>> This makes a huge impact.
>>
>> IOPs are already well server by LVM cache. So, I genuinely ask: what
>> would be tiering advantage here? I'll love to ear a reasonable use
>> case.
>
> LVMcache only helps if the cache is there in the first place and IIRC
> it's cleared after a reboot.
I seem to remember that cache is persistent, but a writeback cache must
be flushed to the underlying disk in case of unclean shutdown. This,
however, should not empty the cache itself.
> It help won't that much over time with large storage. It also wastes
> space.
I tend to disagree: with large storage, you really want an hotspot cache
vs a tiered approach unless:
a) the storage tiers are comparable in size, which is quite rare;
b) the slow storage does some sort of offline compression/deduplication,
with the faster layer being a landing zone for newly ingested data.
Can you describe a reasonable real-world setup where plain LVM tiering
would be useful? Again, this is a genuine question: I am interested in
different storage setup than mine.
Thanks.
--
Danti Gionatan
Supporto Tecnico
Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it
email: g.danti@assyoma.it - info@assyoma.it
GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-09 19:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-02 18:38 [linux-lvm] Looking ahead - tiering with LVM? Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
2020-09-05 11:47 ` Gionatan Danti
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 [this message]
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 \
--in-reply-to=daf74778e6b44904e6a07a4e38c8c03a@assyoma.it \
--to=g.danti@assyoma.it \
--cc=hawken@thehawken.org \
--cc=linux-lvm@redhat.com \
--cc=roy@karlsbakk.net \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).