GPFS is excellent as a clustered filesystem backing a number of servers that need high-throughput, low latency, coherent storage. It's block-oriented.
Ceph is a SAN replacement: can saturate 100 GBps switches with massive parallel throughput. Object based, can also serve up block and (recently, with limits) cooked filesystem.
Gluster is a distributed filesystem - easy to set up and configure, some performance limitations, file rather than object or block oriented.
I'm referring to the FS primitives. GPFS presents a POSIX FS, but it's primitive is blocks. Ceph is an object primitive (RADOS) and can present it a number of ways. And Gluster is based around files as primitives, which gives some interesting strengths and weaknesses.
On the interwebs? No idea. Mine would be:
GPFS is excellent as a clustered filesystem backing a number of servers that need high-throughput, low latency, coherent storage. It's block-oriented.
Ceph is a SAN replacement: can saturate 100 GBps switches with massive parallel throughput. Object based, can also serve up block and (recently, with limits) cooked filesystem.
Gluster is a distributed filesystem - easy to set up and configure, some performance limitations, file rather than object or block oriented.
GPFS is very much file oriented - there's iSCSI target support but I'd be surprised if anyone really used it.
Ceph can provide block (mostly used for VMs), object and file targets, in that order of maturity.
Gluster is sort of a metafilesystem, aggregating some number of underlying filesystems - file being the operative word.
I'm referring to the FS primitives. GPFS presents a POSIX FS, but it's primitive is blocks. Ceph is an object primitive (RADOS) and can present it a number of ways. And Gluster is based around files as primitives, which gives some interesting strengths and weaknesses.
>Ceph can provide block (mostly used for VMs), object and file targets, in that order of maturity.
That's a little bit backwards. Ceph's block storage is actually built upon objects internally.