[Openstack] Why GlusterFS should not be integrated with OpenStack

Maciej Gałkiewicz macias at shellycloud.com
Tue Sep 10 15:22:03 UTC 2013

On 10 September 2013 16:42, John Mark Walker <johnmark at johnmark.org> wrote:
> I'm happy to help you test out 3.4. A lot has changed with it, and much of
> it affects the use cases you described, specifically libgfapi, the QEMU
> integration, Nova integration, and the block device translator.

I would like to test libgfapi but if I understand correctly in current
form it access volume file stored on glusterfs volume used by cinder.
Is it correct?

> Our dev process is now also much cleaner and inclusive - you can see the
> results of our recent 3.5 feature decisions here:
> http://www.gluster.org/community/documentation/index.php/Planning35

Glusterfs releases are rare. At least they were between 3.2 - 3.4. Do
you have any roadmap with actual release dates?

> Incidentally, you seem to be allergic to qcow2 files :)  We have some
> performance numbers that may be eye-opening to you (and many others).

I am not:) I just really like the way how it is implemented in Ceph
and integrated with Cinder.

Maciej Gałkiewicz
Shelly Cloud Sp. z o. o., Sysadmin
http://shellycloud.com/, macias at shellycloud.com
KRS: 0000440358 REGON: 101504426

More information about the Openstack mailing list