Open Stack

Apologies about missing this question earlier, here's a thread on
openstack-operators where this was covered:
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/2015-May/007142.html

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 2:24 PM Forrest Flagg <fostro.flagg at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Looking at the documentation for Fuel 6.0 [1] and it's stated that when
> using Ceph one should disable qcow2 so that images are stored in raw
> format.  This is due to the fact that Ceph includes its own mechanisms for
> copy-on-write and snapshots.  According to [2] this is true only when using
> a BTRFS file system, but in Fuel 6.0 Ceph uses XFS which doesn't provide
> this functionality.  Also, [2] recommends not using BTRFS for production as
> it isn't considered fully mature.  In addition, Fuel 6.0 [3] states that
> OpenStack with raw images doesn't support snapshotting.
>
> Given this, why does Fuel suggest not using qcow2 with Ceph?  How can Ceph
> be useful if snapshotting isn't an option with raw images and qcow2 isn't
> recommended?  Are there other factors to take into consideration that I'm
> missing?
>
> [1]
> https://docs.mirantis.com/openstack/fuel/fuel-6.0/terminology.html#qcow2
> [2]
> http://ceph.com/docs/master/rados/configuration/filesystem-recommendations/
> [3]
> https://docs.mirantis.com/openstack/fuel/fuel-6.0/user-guide.html#qcow-format-ug
>
> Forrest
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150529/527e6e60/attachment.html>