Shulou(Shulou.com)05/31 Report--

This article is to share with you what is the difference between Ceph and Gluster in big data's storage system comparison. The editor thinks it is very practical, so share it with you as a reference and follow the editor to have a look.

In the field of distributed storage, Ceph and Gluster are two common open source software platforms that can be used to store and manage large amounts of data. In the process of technology selection, it is necessary to compare the two. The difference between them is mainly reflected in the complexity of data storage and retrieval.

Both Ceph and Gluster are classified as SDS, or "software-defined storage". As open source software, they provide users with the flexibility to connect to any supported software or hardware without worrying that the provider may impose some restrictions on the operating system.

Ranga Rangachari, vice president and general manager of RedHat, describes the difference between the two projects as:

Ceph is an important part of OpenStack. In the community, most OpenStack implementations use Ceph as the underlying storage layer. Gluster is a typical file service, secondary storage and deep archiving.

Simply put, both Ceph and Gluster provide powerful storage capacity, but Gluster performs well at a higher level and can be increased from TB to PB in a short period of time. Ceph does provide fast storage expansion, but its storage format is suitable for short-term storage that users access more frequently.

Overview

Ceph: scalable object storage with block and file capabilities

Gluster: scalable file storage with object function

Ceph uses object storage, which means it stores data in binary objects distributed across many computers. It uses OpenStack technology to build a private cloud system where users can mix unstructured and structured data in the same system.

Gluster uses block storage, which stores a set of data in blocks in the open space of the connected Linux computer. It builds a highly scalable system that can access more traditional storage and file transfer protocols and can scale quickly without a single point of failure. This means that you can store large amounts of old data without losing accessibility or security. A study by IOP Science in April 2014 showed that Gluster outperformed Ceph, but there was still some instability that could lead to some or all data loss.

Interaction with files

Both use standard POSIX or NFS interfaces, and users can interact with data as if they were through a standard file system. Provide a search and retrieval interface for your stored data.

Ceph distributes data among computers in a cluster, allowing users to access all data at once through an interface. On the back end, CephFS communicates with different parts of the cluster and stores data without much user intervention. Multiple clients can also access stored data without intervention.

Ceph control panel to manage and monitor the system through Calamari

Gluster also distributes data to connected computers, but the data is stored in blocks and everything is kept together. GlusterFS finds a storage area of the appropriate size for the data in any storage location, places the data to be stored, and creates an identity hash. The program stores data on the kernel system and does not generate another metadata system, but creates a unique hash for the file. Gluster responds and scales faster than competitors without metadata server interference, but remains available. From the interface, users will see their data blocks in the form of directories. Because each file has a unique hash, the user must make a copy before renaming, otherwise they will lose access to the data.

GDash-GlusterFS Control Panel

In addition,

Ceph requires odd-numbered monitoring nodes throughout the system to obtain arbitration sets and reduce the possibility of split-brain problems and data loss.

The default block size for Gluster is twice that of Ceph: Gluster is 128k and Ceph is 64k. Gluster claims that the increased block size can speed up processing, but with a little work, you can increase the block size and functionality of Ceph.

Both programs are open source, but companies can connect to Ceph and Gluster by purchasing third-party management solutions. The most popular management tools come from the following manufacturers:

Ceph:InkTank,RedHat,Decapod,Intel

Gluster:RedHat

Conclusion

Whether or not to use Ceph and Gluster depends on many factors, but either can provide scalable and stable data storage. Enterprises looking for storage space that is easy to access and can scale up quickly may be appropriate to use Ceph. Those who plan to store a lot of data without too much movement may want to pay attention to Gluster.

Attached: comparison table between Ceph and GlusterFS

Thank you for reading! This is the end of the article on "what is the difference between Ceph and Gluster in the comparison of big data storage systems". I hope the above content can be of some help to you, so that you can learn more knowledge. if you think the article is good, you can share it for more people to see!

Welcome to subscribe "Shulou Technology Information " to get latest news, interesting things and hot topics in the IT industry, and controls the hottest and latest Internet news, technology news and IT industry trends.