[Openstack] Why GlusterFS should not be integrated with OpenStack

Diego Parrilla Santamaría diego.parrilla.santamaria at gmail.com
Tue Sep 10 13:15:44 UTC 2013

You are describing the problems of using a shared filesystem backend for
cinder, instead of using a driver with direct connection at block-device

It has improved a lot in the last 18 months or so, specially if you want to
use as shared storage for your VMs.

Seems the snapshotting feature is on the way:

But the killer feature is the direct access from QEMU to Gluster using
libgfapi. It seems it has been added in Havana and it's in master branch
since mid August:

If I had to consider a scalable storage solution for an Openstack
deployment for the next 10 years, I would consider Gluster.


Diego Parrilla
*www.stackops.com | * diego.parrilla at stackops.com** | +34 649 94 43 29 |
* <http://www.stackops.com/>


On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Maciej Gałkiewicz
<macias at shellycloud.com>wrote:

> Hello
> For everyone looking for some info regarding GlusterFS and Openstack
> integration I suggest my blog post:
> https://shellycloud.com/blog/2013/09/why-glusterfs-should-not-be-implemented-with-openstack
> regards
> --
> Maciej Gałkiewicz
> Shelly Cloud Sp. z o. o., Sysadmin
> http://shellycloud.com/, macias at shellycloud.com
> KRS: 0000440358 REGON: 101504426
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list:
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> Post to     : openstack at lists.openstack.org
> Unsubscribe :
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20130910/65065a1b/attachment.html>

More information about the Openstack mailing list