Storage backends comparison
OpenShift supports a number of persistent storage backends that work differently. Some of them support reads/writes from many clients (like NFS), while others support only one mount.
The following table contains a comparison of supported storage backends/plugins:
Volume backend | ReadWriteOnce | ReadWriteMany | ReadOnlyMany |
AWS EBS | Yes |
| |
Azure Disk | Yes | ||
Ceph RBD | Yes | Yes | |
Fibre Channel | Yes | Yes | |
GCE Persistent Disk | Yes | ||
GlusterFS | Yes | Yes | Yes |
HostPath | Yes | ||
iSCSI | Yes | Yes | |
NFS (Network File System) | Yes | Yes | Yes |
OpenStack Cinder | Yes | ||
VMware vSphere | Yes | ||
Local | Yes |
Note
HostPath allows you to mount persistent storage directly from the node your pod runs on and as such is not suitable for production usage. Please only use it for testing or development purposes.
There are two types of supported storage in an OpenShift cluster:
- Filesystem-based storage (like NFS, Gluster, and HostPath)
- Block-based storage (like iSCSI, OpenStack Cinder, and so on)
Docker containers need file system-based storage to use as a persistent volume. This...
