User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Linux and object storage devices

Linux and object storage devices

Posted Nov 5, 2008 6:50 UTC (Wed) by dlang (subscriber, #313)
In reply to: Linux and object storage devices by gdt
Parent article: Linux and object storage devices

so why would you use OSD instead of one of the many network/cluster file systems? they all abstract the block device away and let the server at the far side do whatever it wants for the data storage.

the only 'advantage' this would have is that instead of using cheap, common ethernet, it requires a SCSI layer (parallel SCSI or fiberchannel), you could mix and match normal storage with OSD storage, but they really are so different that I would not expect them to be mixed in practice.


(Log in to post comments)

Linux and object storage devices

Posted Nov 5, 2008 8:36 UTC (Wed) by jamesh (guest, #1159) [Link]

They probably want something that isn't quite as high level as a NAS box such as abstraction of the actual location of the file data (flash, disk, tape, etc), while not imposing a particular high level file system interface as you'd get with NFS or SMB.

It'd probably also make it easy to do things like run multiple file system hierarchies off the same object store, rather than having to worry about growing or shrinking partitions.

Lastly, this doesn't look incompatible with using ethernet to connect to the storage device: people have been running SCSI over ethernet for years with iSCSI.

Linux and object storage devices

Posted Nov 6, 2008 12:01 UTC (Thu) by csamuel (✭ supporter ✭, #2624) [Link]

This *has* come from the cluster filesystems, I first came across OSD's in 2004 as
part of the Lustre file system design. The idea is that you have a whole bunch of
OSD's and you parallelise your I/O across them.

Lustre is now owned by Sun...


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds