[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: confusion over storage for logging



I have an active PR for that in the Scaling Performance Section [0][1][2].

Once it lands, I plan to add more references to that section from the Registry, Metrics, & Logging install docs.

[0] https://github.com/openshift/openshift-docs/pull/6033
[1] https://github.com/tmorriso-rh/openshift-docs/blob/89e0641169ea9cc35c5c4adb538639aeff62e8b4/scaling_performance/optimizing_storage.adoc#general-storage-guidelines
[2] https://github.com/tmorriso-rh/openshift-docs/blob/89e0641169ea9cc35c5c4adb538639aeff62e8b4/scaling_performance/optimizing_storage.adoc#back-end-recommendations


___________________________________________________

LOUIS P. SANTILLAN

SENIOR CONSULTANT, OPENSHIFT, MIDDLEWARE & DEVOPS

Red Hat Consulting, NA US WEST

lpsantil gmail com    M: 3236334854    


On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Rich Megginson <rmeggins redhat com> wrote:
On 11/01/2017 10:50 AM, Tim Dudgeon wrote:
I am confused over persistent storage for logging (elasticsearch).

The latest advanced installer docs [1] specifically describes how to define using NFS for persistent storage, but the docs for "aggregating container logs" [2] says that NFS should not be used (except in one particular scenario) and seems to suggest that the only really suitable scenario is to use a volume (disk) directly mounted to each logging node.

Could someone clarify the situtation?

Elasticsearch says do not use NFS. https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/guide/2.x/indexing-performance.html#_storage

We should make that clear in the docs.

Please file a doc bug.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]