Open Stack

Kamil,

Thanks for reminding us about that blueprint, we're definitely
considering Hammer and as soon as we have enough confidence in its
stability we'll integrate it into 7.0. I'll check with our Ceph team
to make sure they update the blueprint to refer to Hammer instead of
Giant.

We already have Ceph 0.80.9 packaged for 6.1:
http://mirror.fuel-infra.org/fwm/6.1/ubuntu/pool/main/c/ceph/

-DmitryB


On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 3:12 AM, Rogon, Kamil <kamil.rogon at intel.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
>
> I would like to ask what Ceph versions are scheduled for next releases.
>
>
>
> I see the blueprint [1] for upgrading to next stable release (from Firefly
> to Giant), but it is still in drafting state.
>
> That upgrade is important for Fuel 7.0 release, as this introduces a lot of
> improvements in case of flash backends which is essential nowadays.
>
> I think you should consider next Ceph version (Hammer) as this is marked as
> LTS and should supersede 0.80.x Firefly. What’s more this is already lunched
> [2].
>
>
>
> Regarding the upcoming 6.0.1 / 6.1 release I understand that you are stick
> with Firefly branch. However will it be updated from 0.80.7 to 0.80.9? It
> fixes some performance regression in librbd [3].
>
>
>
> [1] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/upgrade-ceph
>
> [2] http://ceph.com/docs/next/releases/
>
> [3] http://docs.ceph.com/docs/next/release-notes/#v0-80-9-firefly
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Kamil Rogon
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Intel Technology Poland sp. z o.o.
> KRS 101882
> ul. Slowackiego 173
> 80-298 Gdansk
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>



-- 
Dmitry Borodaenko