[Openstack] Why GlusterFS should not be integrated with OpenStack

Maciej Gałkiewicz macias at shellycloud.com
Tue Sep 10 14:07:57 UTC 2013

On 10 September 2013 15:15, Diego Parrilla Santamaría <
diego.parrilla.santamaria at gmail.com> wrote:

> You are describing the problems of using a shared filesystem backend for
> cinder, instead of using a driver with direct connection at block-device
> level.
This is how it is implemented right now in Grizzly. You are right about
block-device level but this is not where it goes. Take a look at

> 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:
> https://github.com/openstack/cinder/blob/master/cinder/volume/drivers/glusterfs.py
> Exactly, using qcow.

> 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:
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/39498/
> If I had to consider a scalable storage solution for an Openstack
> deployment for the next 10 years, I would consider Gluster.

Just out of curiosity. Have you tested any other Cinder backends?

Maciej Gałkiewicz
Shelly Cloud Sp. z o. o., Sysadmin
http://shellycloud.com/, macias at shellycloud.com
KRS: 0000440358 REGON: 101504426
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20130910/68c65fe4/attachment.html>

More information about the Openstack mailing list