Gluster blog stories provide high-level spotlights on our users all over the world
That is a pretty drastic title, especially given that I spend a significant part of my day job working with EMC storage arrays. The other day I replied to a tweet by Scott Lowe :
@scott_lowe with things like Gluster and Ceph what does shared storage actually give apart from complications?
— Chris Cowley (@chriscowleyunix) September 11, 2013
Due to time-zone differences between France and the USA I missed out on most of the heated conversation that ensued. From what I could see it quickly got out of hand, with people replying to so many others that they barely had any space to say anything. I am sure it has spawned a load of blog posts, as Twitter is eminently unsuitable for that sort of conversation (at least I have seen one by StorageZilla.
The boundary between DAS (Direct Attached Storage) and remote storage (be that a SAN or NAS) is blurring. Traditionally a SAN/NAS array is a proprietary box that gives you bits of disk space that is available to whatever server (or servers) that you want. Conversely, DAS is attached either inside the server or to the back of it. Sharing between multiple servers is possible, but not very slick – no switched fabric, no software configuration, cables have to be physically moved.
Now everything is blurring. In the FLOSS world there is the like of Ceph and GlusterFS, which take your DAS (or whatever) and turn that into a shared pool of storage. You can put this on dedicated boxes, depending on your workload that may well be the best idea. However you are not forced to. To my mind this is a more elegant solution. I have a collection of identical servers, I use some for compute, other for storage, others for both. You can pick and choose, even doing it live.
The thing is, even the array vendors are now using DAS. An EMC VNX is commodity hardware, as is the VMAX (mostly, I believe there is an ASIC used in the encryption engine), Isilion, NetApp, Dell Compellent, HP StoreVirtual (formerly Lefthand). What is the difference in the way they attach their disks? Technically none I suppose, it is just hidden away.
Back to the cloud providers, when you provision a VM there is a process that happens (I am considering Openstack, as that is my area of interest/expertise). You provision an instance and it takes the template you select and copies it to the local storage on that host. Yes you can short-circuit that and use shared storage, but that is unnecessarily complex and introduces a potential failure point. OK, the disk in the host could fail, but then so would the host and it would just go to a new host.
With Openstack, you can use either Ceph or GlusterFS for your block storage (amongst others). When you create block storage for your instance it is created in that pool and replicated. Again, these will in most cases be distributing and replicating local storage. I have known people use SAN arrays as the back-end for Ceph, but that was because they already had them lying around.
There have been various products around for a while to share out your local storage on VMware hosts. VMware’s own VSA, HP StoreVirtual and now Virtual SAN takes this even deeper, giving tiering and tying directly into the host rather than using a VSA. It certainly seems that DAS is the way forward (or a hybrid approach such as PernixData FVP). This makes a huge amount of sense, especially in the brave new world of SSDs. The latencies involved in spinning rust effective masked those of the storage fabric. Now though SSDs are so fast, that the time it takes for a storage object to transverse the SAN becomes a factor. Getting at least the performance storage layer as physically close to the computer layer as possible is now a serious consideration.
Hadoop, the darling of the Big Data lovers, uses HDFS, which also distributes and replicates your data across local storage. GlusterFS can also be used too. You can use EMC arrays, but I do not hear much about that (other than from EMC themselves). The vast majority of Hadoop users seem to be on local storage/HDFS. On a similar note Lustre, very popular in the HPC world, is also designed around local storage.
So what am I getting at here? To be honest I am not sure, but I can see a general move away from centralised storage. Even EMC noticed this ages ago – they were talking about running the hypervisor on the VNX/VMAX. At least that is how I remember it anyway, I may well be wrong (if I am, then it is written on the internet now, so it must be true). Red Hat own GlusterFS and are pushing it centre stage for Openstack, Ceph is also an excellent solution and has the weight of Mark Shuttleworth and Canonical behind it. VMware have been pushing Virtual SAN hard and it seems to have got a lot of people really excited. I just do not see anything really exciting in centralised storage, everything interesting is based around DAS.
2020 has not been a year we would have been able to predict. With a worldwide pandemic and lives thrown out of gear, as we head into 2021, we are thankful that our community and project continued to receive new developers, users and make small gains. For that and a...
It has been a while since we provided an update to the Gluster community. Across the world various nations, states and localities have put together sets of guidelines around shelter-in-place and quarantine. We request our community members to stay safe, to care for their loved ones, to continue to be...
The initial rounds of conversation around the planning of content for release 8 has helped the project identify one key thing – the need to stagger out features and enhancements over multiple releases. Thus, while release 8 is unlikely to be feature heavy as previous releases, it will be the...