Also many thanks from my side! Am 18.07.2018 um 03:04 schrieb Linh Vu: > Thanks for all your hard work in putting out the fixes so quickly! :) > > We have a cluster on 12.2.5 with Bluestore and EC pool but for CephFS, not > RGW. In the release notes, it says RGW is a risk especially the garbage > collection, and the recommendation is to either pause IO or disable RGW > garbage collection. > > > In our case with CephFS, not RGW, is it a lot less risky to perform the > upgrade to 12.2.7 without the need to pause IO? > > > What does pause IO do? Do current sessions just get queued up and IO resume > normally with no problem after unpausing?
That's my understanding, pause blocks any reads and writes. If the processes
accessing CephFS do not have any wallclock-related timeout handlers, they
should be fine IMHO.
I'm unsure how NFS Ganesha
But indeed I have the very same question - we also have a pure CephFS cluster,
without RGW, EC-pool-backed, on 12.2.5. Should we pause IO during upgrade?
I wonder whether it is risky / unrisky to upgrade without pausing I/O?
The update notes in the blog do not state whether a pure CephFS setup is
affected.
Cheers,
Oliver
>
>
> If we have to pause IO, is it better to do something like: pause IO, restart
> OSDs on one node, unpause IO - repeated for all the nodes involved in the EC
> pool?
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Linh
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* ceph-users <ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com> on behalf of Sage Weil
> <s...@newdream.net>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 18 July 2018 4:42:41 AM
> *To:* Stefan Kooman
> *Cc:* ceph-annou...@ceph.com; ceph-de...@vger.kernel.org;
> ceph-maintain...@ceph.com; ceph-us...@ceph.com
> *Subject:* Re: [ceph-users] v12.2.7 Luminous released
>
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2018, Stefan Kooman wrote:
>> Quoting Abhishek Lekshmanan (abhis...@suse.com):
>>
>> > *NOTE* The v12.2.5 release has a potential data corruption issue with
>> > erasure coded pools. If you ran v12.2.5 with erasure coding, please see
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> > below.
>>
>> < snip >
>>
>> > Upgrading from v12.2.5 or v12.2.6
>> > ---------------------------------
>> >
>> > If you used v12.2.5 or v12.2.6 in combination with erasure coded
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> > pools, there is a small risk of corruption under certain workloads.
>> > Specifically, when:
>>
>> < snip >
>>
>> One section mentions Luminous clusters _with_ EC pools specifically, the
>> other
>> section mentions Luminous clusters running 12.2.5.
>
> I think they both do?
>
>> I might be misreading this, but to make things clear for current Ceph
>> Luminous 12.2.5 users. Is the following statement correct?
>>
>> If you do _NOT_ use EC in your 12.2.5 cluster (only replicated pools), there
>> is
>> no need to quiesce IO (ceph osd pause).
>
> Correct.
>
>> http://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/releases/luminous/#upgrading-from-other-versions
>> If your cluster did not run v12.2.5 or v12.2.6 then none of the above
>> issues apply to you and you should upgrade normally.
>>
>> ^^ Above section would indicate all 12.2.5 luminous clusters.
>
> The intent here is to clarify that any cluster running 12.2.4 or
> older can upgrade without reading carefully. If the cluster
> does/did run 12.2.5 or .6, then read carefully because it may (or may not)
> be affected.
>
> Does that help? Any suggested revisions to the wording in the release
> notes that make it clearer are welcome!
>
> Thanks-
> sage
>
>
>>
>> Please clarify,
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Stefan
>>
>> --
>> | BIT BV http://www.bit.nl/ Kamer van Koophandel 09090351
>> | GPG: 0xD14839C6 +31 318 648 688 / i...@bit.nl
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
>> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
