Ah, I didn’t notice the release it was for. Sorry ☹ I now know to pay closer attention to that when I am on the Ceph docs ☹
From: Anthony D'Atri <anthony.da...@gmail.com> Sent: February 4, 2025 16:19 To: Anthony D'Atri <anthony.da...@gmail.com> Cc: Alan Murrell <a...@t-net.ca>; ceph-users@ceph.io Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Spec file: Possible typo in example: *** This is an EXTERNAL email. Please exercise caution. DO NOT open attachments or click links from unknown senders or unexpected email. *** Now that I’m not on my phone … Note the URL that you supplied: it specifies the documentation branch for the Octopus release, which is now EOL. This can happen especially when following search engine results for a query. This highlights the value in ensuring that one gets the appropriate docs for the release in question. For recent releases you can usually edit the URL in-situ. In this case the file topology changed. The Pacific release restructured this section and this content is now found under cephadm/services/osd: [cid:image001.png@01DB7724.93A7D760] ceph/doc/cephadm/services/osd.rst at 6c97777c921609acd26242f99a1c9dbbcd667f3e · ceph/ceph<https://github.com/ceph/ceph/blob/6c97777c921609acd26242f99a1c9dbbcd667f3e/doc/cephadm/services/osd.rst?plain=1#L762> github.com<https://github.com/ceph/ceph/blob/6c97777c921609acd26242f99a1c9dbbcd667f3e/doc/cephadm/services/osd.rst?plain=1#L762> Following the git branches through Quincy then Reef I see [cid:image001.png@01DB7724.93A7D760] Blaming ceph/doc/cephadm/services/osd.rst at reef · ceph/ceph<https://github.com/ceph/ceph/blame/reef/doc/cephadm/services/osd.rst#L818> github.com<https://github.com/ceph/ceph/blame/reef/doc/cephadm/services/osd.rst#L818> that this was caught and fixed ~ 3 years ago. On Feb 4, 2025, at 5:27 PM, Anthony D'Atri <anthony.da...@gmail.com<mailto:anthony.da...@gmail.com>> wrote: Nice catch. I’ll get a fix in. On Feb 4, 2025, at 2:10 PM, Alan Murrell <a...@t-net.ca<mailto:a...@t-net.ca>> wrote: Hello, I am not sure if this is the right list to put this, but I was just looking over the documentation for the Service Spec file: https://docs.ceph.com/en/octopus/cephadm/drivegroups/ and under one of the "Advanced Cases" example, I believe there *might* be an error? Here is the example (for 20 HDDs, 12 SSDs, 2 NVMEs): --- START --- service_type: osd service_id: osd_spec_hdd placement: host_pattern: '*' data_devices: rotational: 0 db_devices: model: MC-55-44-XZ limit: 2 (db_slots is actually to be favoured here, but it's not implemented yet) --- service_type: osd service_id: osd_spec_ssd placement: host_pattern: '*' data_devices: model: MC-55-44-XZ db_devices: vendor: VendorC --- END --- For the 'data_devices' under the 'osd_spec_hdd' layout, should 'rotational' not be '1' instead of '0'? The earlier "Simple" example (20 HDDs, 2 SSDs) has 'rotational' as '1'. _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io<mailto:ceph-users@ceph.io> To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io<mailto:ceph-users-le...@ceph.io> _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io<mailto:ceph-users@ceph.io> To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io<mailto:ceph-users-le...@ceph.io>
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io
