Re: [atomic-devel] Fedora 26 change: using overlayfs as default

On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 01:38:09PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 01/06/2017 11:24 AM, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 04:16:45PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > >> So, I've done some testing, thanks to Dusty's setup. > >> > >> I wasn'

Re: [atomic-devel] Fedora 26 change: using overlayfs as default

On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 10:07:05AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 01/05/2017 05:15 PM, Jeremy Eder wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Josh Berkus > >wrote: > > > > Also, performance is MUCH better on PostgreSQL pgbench than devicemapper > > is. Like 3X

Re: [atomic-devel] Fedora 26 change: using overlayfs as default

On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 04:16:45PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > So, I've done some testing, thanks to Dusty's setup. > > I wasn't able to test on Kubernetes because of some setup issues. > However, I hammered away at Docker using some IO-intensive applications, > including PostgreSQL and Etcd, both

Re: [atomic-devel] Fedora 26 change: using overlayfs as default

On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 10:16:13AM +0200, Marius Vollmer wrote: > Vivek Goyal writes: > > > [...] And if overlayfs does not work for a user, switching back to > > devmapper should be easy. > > > > - atomic storage reset > > - edit /etc/sysconfig/docker-storag

Re: [atomic-devel] Fedora 26 change: using overlayfs as default

On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 01:30:21PM -0500, Jonathan Lebon wrote: > The Docker docs also has a breakdown of incompatibilities: > > https://docs.docker.com/engine/userguide/storagedriver/overlayfs-driver/#/overlayfs-compatibility > > Notably, there's the open(2) issue that has already been > mention

Re: [atomic-devel] Fedora 26 change: using overlayfs as default

On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 09:18:35AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote: > Dan, Dusty, Vivek: > > So far nobody has defined (technically) the exact problem with overlayfs > and how it affects applications which want to write data inside the > container. > > Note that just saying "don't use Overlay for persis

Re: [atomic-devel] Fedora 26 change: using overlayfs as default

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 11:04:28AM -0500, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > > On 12/14/2016 10:38 AM, Dusty Mabe wrote: > > > > On 12/14/2016 07:51 AM, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > >> I have heard that the issue with yum/rpm is being worked on in the kernel. > >> For those that to not know the issue is for progr

Re: [atomic-devel] Running docker-storage-setup from a UI

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:32:20AM +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote: [..] > > So If I create a partition say /dev/sdb1 and create "mkfs.xfs /dev/sdb1" > > and later remove partition /dev/sdb1 (which will leave xfs signature > > somewhere around 2048 sector by default) and then pass disk /dev/sdb > > to

Re: [atomic-devel] Running docker-storage-setup from a UI

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:02:49PM +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote: > Vivek Goyal writes: > > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 02:46:24PM +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote: > > > >> Sorry, I was talking about d-s-s. Do you think it is a bug in d-s-s > >> that pvcreate mig

Re: [atomic-devel] Storage use cases for the "atomic" command

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 03:53:20PM +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote: > Hi, > > I am working on this, as you know: > > https://github.com/cockpit-project/cockpit/wiki/Atomic:-Docker-Storage > > and after getting my misunderstandings of docker-storage-setup cleared > up, my next idea is to change t

Re: [atomic-devel] Running docker-storage-setup from a UI

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 02:46:24PM +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote: > Vivek Goyal writes: > > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 10:45:03AM +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote: > >> > >> In your opinion, is it a bug or a feature that pvcreate might prompt > >> like this? >

Re: [atomic-devel] Running docker-storage-setup from a UI

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 10:45:03AM +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote: > Vivek Goyal writes: > > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 10:36:40AM +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote: > > > >> [..] So any user-prompting from docker-storage-setup is a bug? I get > >> a prompt from pvcr

Re: [atomic-devel] Running docker-storage-setup from a UI

On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 10:36:40AM +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote: > Vivek Goyal writes: > > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 03:09:08PM +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote: > > > >> - Docker-storage-setup needs to run non-interactively, but I think it > >> can't do

Re: [atomic-devel] Running docker-storage-setup from a UI

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 04:06:45PM -0400, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > > > On 04/12/2016 03:50 PM, Vivek Goyal wrote: > >On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 03:09:08PM +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote: > >>Hi, > >> > >>I am working on this: > >> > >> ht

Re: [atomic-devel] Running docker-storage-setup from a UI

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 03:09:08PM +0300, Marius Vollmer wrote: > Hi, > > I am working on this: > > https://github.com/cockpit-project/cockpit/wiki/Atomic:-Docker-Storage > > which is basically a UI inside Cockpit for docker-storage-setup. > > I am not super far along, but I am getting to t

Re: [atomic-devel] Proposal for default qcow2 image virtual size 10G instead of 6G

Actually, point is, why not give a more reasonable default out of box so that user does not have to customize it using cloud-init at all. Thanks Vivek On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 05:19:07PM +, Muayyad AlSadi wrote: > Then cloud init > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015, 8:18 PM Vivek Goy

Re: [atomic-devel] Proposal for default qcow2 image virtual size 10G instead of 6G

I use virt-manager to import the image directly. No cloud init. Thanks Vivek On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 05:19:07PM +, Muayyad AlSadi wrote: > Then cloud init > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015, 8:18 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > Sure. But all these are manual steps. Trying to give bette

Re: [atomic-devel] Proposal for default qcow2 image virtual size 10G instead of 6G

e > > qemu-img resize myimg.qcow2 +20G > > then boot it then type > > xfs_growfs / > > Or use cloud init > > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015, 8:04 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > Not sure what you are trying to say? > > > > Thanks > > Vivek > > &

Re: [atomic-devel] Proposal for default qcow2 image virtual size 10G instead of 6G

On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 12:58:58PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015, at 12:50 PM, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > Virtual size of qcow2 f22 atomic size is 6G. > > This comes from > https://pagure.io/releng/blob/master/f/scripts/build-cloud-images#_93 > &g

Re: [atomic-devel] Proposal for default qcow2 image virtual size 10G instead of 6G

Not sure what you are trying to say? Thanks Vivek On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 04:59:08PM +, Muayyad AlSadi wrote: > It's xfs so it will just expand. > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015, 7:51 PM Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Virtual size of qcow2 f22 atomic siz

[atomic-devel] Proposal for default qcow2 image virtual size 10G instead of 6G

Hi, Virtual size of qcow2 f22 atomic size is 6G. I am wondering if there is a reason behind such small size. Will 10G be a better default. Right now out of 6G, 3G is consumed by rootfs. We also setup thin pool for docker which will consume 40% of free space (or 2G minimum). Some people are findin