On 02/12/2019 16:48, Florian Haas wrote:
> Doc patch PR is here, for anyone who would feels inclined to review:
>
> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/31893
Landed, here's the new documentation:
https://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/rbd/rbd-exclusive-locks/
Thanks everyone for c
On 19/11/2019 22:42, Florian Haas wrote:
> On 19/11/2019 22:34, Jason Dillaman wrote:
>>> Oh totally, I wasn't arguing it was a bad idea for it to do what it
>>> does! I just got confused by the fact that our mon logs showed what
>>> looked like a (failed) attem
On 19/11/2019 22:34, Jason Dillaman wrote:
>> Oh totally, I wasn't arguing it was a bad idea for it to do what it
>> does! I just got confused by the fact that our mon logs showed what
>> looked like a (failed) attempt to blacklist an entire client IP address.
>
> There should have been an associa
On 19/11/2019 22:19, Jason Dillaman wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 4:09 PM Florian Haas wrote:
>>
>> On 19/11/2019 21:32, Jason Dillaman wrote:
>>>> What, exactly, is the "reasonably configured hypervisor" here, in other
>>>> words, what is it
On 19/11/2019 21:32, Jason Dillaman wrote:
>> What, exactly, is the "reasonably configured hypervisor" here, in other
>> words, what is it that grabs and releases this lock? It's evidently not
>> Nova that does this, but is it libvirt, or Qemu/KVM, and if so, what
>> magic in there makes this happe
On 19/11/2019 20:03, Jason Dillaman wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 1:51 PM shubjero wrote:
>>
>> Florian,
>>
>> Thanks for posting about this issue. This is something that we have
>> been experiencing (stale exclusive locks) with our OpenStack and Ceph
>> cloud more frequently as our datacentre
On 15/11/2019 14:27, Simon Ironside wrote:
> Hi Florian,
>
> On 15/11/2019 12:32, Florian Haas wrote:
>
>> I received this off-list but then subsequently saw this message pop up
>> in the list archive, so I hope it's OK to reply on-list?
>
> Of course, I just
On 15/11/2019 11:23, Simon Ironside wrote:
> Hi Florian,
>
> Any chance the key your compute nodes are using for the RBD pool is
> missing 'allow command "osd blacklist"' from its mon caps?
>
> Simon
Hi Simon,
I received this off-list but then subsequently saw this message pop up
in the list ar
Hi everyone,
I'm trying to wrap my head around an issue we recently saw, as it
relates to RBD locks, Qemu/KVM, and libvirt.
Our data center graced us with a sudden and complete dual-feed power
failure that affected both a Ceph cluster (Luminous, 12.2.12), and
OpenStack compute nodes that used RBD
Hi Mohamad!
On 31/12/2018 19:30, Mohamad Gebai wrote:
> On 12/31/18 4:51 AM, Marcus Murwall wrote:
>> What you say does make sense though as I also get the feeling that the
>> osds are just waiting for something. Something that never happens and
>> the request finally timeout...
>
> So the OSDs a
Hi everyone,
We have a Luminous cluster (12.2.10) on Ubuntu Xenial, though we have
also observed the same behavior on 12.2.7 on Bionic (download.ceph.com
doesn't build Luminous packages for Bionic, and 12.2.7 is the latest
distro build).
The primary use case for this cluster is radosgw. 6 OSD nod
On 13/12/2018 15:10, Mark Nelson wrote:
> Hi Florian,
>
> On 12/13/18 7:52 AM, Florian Haas wrote:
>> On 02/12/2018 19:48, Florian Haas wrote:
>>> Hi Mark,
>>>
>>> just taking the liberty to follow up on this one, as I'd really like to
>>>
On 02/12/2018 19:48, Florian Haas wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> just taking the liberty to follow up on this one, as I'd really like to
> get to the bottom of this.
>
> On 28/11/2018 16:53, Florian Haas wrote:
>> On 28/11/2018 15:52, Mark Nelson wrote:
>>> O
On 05/12/2018 23:08, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> Hi, another question relating to multi tenanted RGW.
>
> Let's do the working case 1st. For a user that still uses the global
> namespace, if I set a bucket as world readable (header
> "X-Container-Read: .r:*") then I can fetch objects from the bucket vi
On 05/12/2018 17:35, Maxime Guyot wrote:
> Hi Florian,
>
> Thanks for the help. I did further testing and narrowed it down to
> objects that have been uploaded when the bucket has versioning enabled.
> Objects created before that are not affected: all metadata operations
> are still possible.
>
>
Hi Mark,
On 04/12/2018 04:41, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've set up a Luminous RGW with Keystone integration, and subsequently set
>
> rgw keystone implicit tenants = true
>
> So now all newly created users/tenants (or old ones that never accessed
> RGW) get their own namespaces. However t
Hi Mark,
just taking the liberty to follow up on this one, as I'd really like to
get to the bottom of this.
On 28/11/2018 16:53, Florian Haas wrote:
> On 28/11/2018 15:52, Mark Nelson wrote:
>> Option("bluestore_default_buffered_read", Option::TYPE_BOOL,
&
On 28/11/2018 19:06, Maxime Guyot wrote:
> Hi Florian,
>
> You assumed correctly, the "test" container (private) was created with
> the "openstack container create test", then I am using the S3 API to
> enable/disable object versioning on it.
> I use the following Python snippet to enable/disable
On 27/11/2018 20:28, Maxime Guyot wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm running into an issue with the RadosGW Swift API when the S3 bucket
> versioning is enabled. It looks like it silently drops any metadata sent
> with the "X-Object-Meta-foo" header (see example below).
> This is observed on a Luminous 12.2.8 c
On 28/11/2018 15:52, Mark Nelson wrote:
>> Shifting over a discussion from IRC and taking the liberty to resurrect
>> an old thread, as I just ran into the same (?) issue. I see
>> *significantly* reduced performance on RBD reads, compared to writes
>> with the same parameters. "rbd bench --io-type
On 14/08/2018 15:57, Emmanuel Lacour wrote:
> Le 13/08/2018 à 16:58, Jason Dillaman a écrit :
>>
>> See [1] for ways to tweak the bluestore cache sizes. I believe that by
>> default, bluestore will not cache any data but instead will only
>> attempt to cache its key/value store and metadata.
>
> I
On 19/11/2018 16:23, Florian Haas wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I've recently started a documentation patch to better explain Swift
> compatibility and OpenStack integration for radosgw; a WIP PR is at
> https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/25056/. I have, however, run into an
Hi everyone,
I've recently started a documentation patch to better explain Swift
compatibility and OpenStack integration for radosgw; a WIP PR is at
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/25056/. I have, however, run into an
issue that I would really *like* to document, except I don't know
whether what
On 18/11/2018 22:08, Dilip Renkila wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We are provisioning openstack swift api though ceph rgw (mimic). We have
> problems when trying to create two containers in two projects of same
> name. After scraping web, i came to know that i have to enable
>
> * rgw_keystone_implicit_te
>> > Okay, in that case I've no idea. What was the timeline for the recovery
>> > versus the rados bench and cleanup versus the degraded object counts,
>> > then?
>>
>> 1. Jewel deployment with filestore.
>> 2. Upgrade to Luminous (including mgr deployment and "ceph osd
>> require-osd-release lumin
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 7:56 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 10:52 AM Florian Haas wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Gregory Farnum
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 3:50 AM Florian Haas
&
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 3:50 AM Florian Haas wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 8:13 PM, Andreas Herrmann
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > how could this happen:
>>
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 8:13 PM, Andreas Herrmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> how could this happen:
>
> pgs: 197528/1524 objects degraded (12961.155%)
>
> I did some heavy failover tests, but a value higher than 100% looks strange
> (ceph version 12.2.0). Recovery is quite slow.
>
> cluster:
>
On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>> > The other reason we maintain the full set of deleted snaps is to prevent
>> > client operations from re-creating deleted snapshots — we filter all
>> > client IO which includes snaps against the deleted_snaps set in the PG.
>> > Apparentl
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Christian Theune wrote:
> Hi,
>
> and here’s another update which others might find quite interesting.
>
> Florian and I spend some time discussing the issue further, face to face. I
> had one switch that I brought up again (—osd-recovery-start-delay) which I
> l
On 09/16/2017 01:36 AM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 1:10 PM Florian Haas <mailto:flor...@hastexo.com>> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 8:27 PM, Mclean, Patrick
> mailto:patrick.mcl...@sony.com>> wrote:
> >
> > On 20
On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Christian Theune wrote:
> Hi Josh,
>
>> On Sep 16, 2017, at 3:13 AM, Josh Durgin wrote:
>>
>> (Sorry for top posting, this email client isn't great at editing)
>
> Thanks for taking the time to respond. :)
>
>> The mitigation strategy I mentioned before of forcing
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:37 PM, Josh Durgin wrote:
>> So this affects just writes. Then I'm really not following the
>> reasoning behind the current behavior. Why would you want to wait for
>> the recovery of an object that you're about to clobber anyway? Naïvely
>> thinking an object like that
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 8:58 AM, Josh Durgin wrote:
>> OK, maybe the "also" can be removed to reduce potential confusion?
>
>
> Sure
That'd be great. :)
>> - We have a bunch of objects that need to be recovered onto the
>> just-returned OSD(s).
>> - Clients access some of these objects while the
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 2:47 AM, Josh Durgin wrote:
> On 09/13/2017 03:40 AM, Florian Haas wrote:
>>
>> So we have a client that is talking to OSD 30. OSD 30 was never down;
>> OSD 17 was. OSD 30 is also the preferred primary for this PG (via
>> primary affinity). The O
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 3:15 AM, Brad Hubbard wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 8:40 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>>
>> disclaimer upfront: this was seen in the wild on Hammer, and on 0.94.7
>> no less. Reproducing this on 0.94.10 is a pending proce
Hi everyone,
disclaimer upfront: this was seen in the wild on Hammer, and on 0.94.7
no less. Reproducing this on 0.94.10 is a pending process, and we'll
update here with findings, but my goal with this post is really to
establish whether the behavior as seen is expected, and if so, what
the ratio
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 8:27 PM, Mclean, Patrick
wrote:
>
> On 2017-09-08 06:06 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 5:47 PM, Mclean, Patrick
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On a related note, we are very curious why the snapshot id is
> >> incremented when a snapshot is deleted, this create
> In our use case, we are severly hampered by the size of removed_snaps
> (50k+) in the OSDMap to the point were ~80% of ALL cpu time is spent in
> PGPool::update and its interval calculation code. We have a cluster of
> around 100k RBDs with each RBD having upto 25 snapshots and only a small
> por
Hi Greg,
thanks for your insight! I do have a few follow-up questions.
On 09/05/2017 11:39 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>> It seems to me that there still isn't a good recommendation along the
>> lines of "try not to have more than X snapshots per RBD image" or "try
>> not to have more than Y snapsh
Hi everyone,
with the Luminous release out the door and the Labor Day weekend over,
I hope I can kick off a discussion on another issue that has irked me
a bit for quite a while. There doesn't seem to be a good documented
answer to this: what are Ceph's real limits when it comes to RBD
snapshots?
Sorry, I worded my questions poorly in the last email, so I'm asking
for clarification here:
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 6:04 PM, Haomai Wang wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Florian Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 4:21 PM, Haomai Wang wrote:
>>> On Wed,
On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 4:21 PM, Haomai Wang wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 1:26 AM, Florian Haas wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I'm trying to get a handle on the current state of the async messenger's
>> RDMA transport in Luminous, and I've noti
Hello everyone,
I'm trying to get a handle on the current state of the async messenger's
RDMA transport in Luminous, and I've noticed that the information
available is a little bit sparse (I've found
https://community.mellanox.com/docs/DOC-2693 and
https://community.mellanox.com/docs/DOC-2721, whi
Hi everyone,
so this will be a long email — it's a summary of several off-list
conversations I've had over the last couple of weeks, but the TL;DR
version is this question:
How can a Ceph cluster maintain near-constant performance
characteristics while supporting a steady intake of a large number
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:41 AM, Alex Gorbachev
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 6:09 AM, Florian Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Dan van der Ster
>> wrote:
>>>> I'm sorry, I may have worded that in a manner that's easy to
>>>>
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Dan van der Ster wrote:
>> I'm sorry, I may have worded that in a manner that's easy to
>> misunderstand. I generally *never* suggest that people use CFQ on
>> reasonably decent I/O hardware, and thus have never come across any
>> need to set this specific ceph.co
On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 9:07 PM, Laszlo Budai wrote:
> Hi Florian,
>
> thank you for your answer.
>
> We have already set the IO scheduler to cfq in order to be able to lower the
> priority of the scrub operations.
> My problem is that I've found different values set for the same parameter,
> and
On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Laszlo Budai wrote:
>>> Can someone explain the meaning of osd_disk_thread_ioprio_priority. I'm
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> Now I am confused :(
>>>
>>> Can somebody bring some light here?
>>
>>
>> Only to confuse you some more. If you are running Jewel or above then
>>
On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 12:21 PM, wrote:
> The upgrade of our biggest cluster, nr 4, did not go without
> problems. Since we where expecting a lot of "failed to encode map
> e with expected crc" messages, we disabled clog to monitors
> with 'ceph tell osd.* injectargs -- --clog_to_monitors=false'
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Yoann Moulin wrote:
> Le 23/06/2016 08:25, Sarni Sofiane a écrit :
>> Hi Florian,
>>
>
>
>> On 23.06.16 06:25, "ceph-users on behalf of Florian Haas"
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 10:56 AM,
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Yoann Moulin wrote:
> Hello Florian,
>
>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Yoann Moulin wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I found a performance drop between kernel 3.13.0-88 (default kernel on
>>> Ubuntu
>>> Trusty 14.04) and kernel 4.4.0.24.14 (default kernel on Ubuntu
Hi Yoann,
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Yoann Moulin wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I found a performance drop between kernel 3.13.0-88 (default kernel on Ubuntu
> Trusty 14.04) and kernel 4.4.0.24.14 (default kernel on Ubuntu Xenial 16.04)
>
> ceph version is Jewel (10.2.2).
> All tests have been done u
On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 11:57 PM, Robert Sander
wrote:
> Am 29.04.2016 um 17:11 schrieb Robert Sander:
>
>> As the backfilling with the full weight of the new OSDs would have run
>> for more than 28h and no VM was usable we re-weighted the new OSDs to
>> 0.1. The backfilling finished after about 2h
Hi everyone,
I wonder what others think about the following suggestion: running an
even number of mons almost never makes sense, and specifically two
mons never does at all. Wouldn't it make sense to just flag a
HEALTH_WARN state if the monmap contained an even number of mons, or
maybe only if the
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Simon Ferber
wrote:
> Thank you! That's it. I have installed the Kernel from the Jessie
> backport. Now the crashes are gone.
> How often do these things happen? It would be a worst case scenario, if
> a system update breaks a productive system.
For what it's wor
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 10:09 PM, German Anders wrote:
> also jewel does not supposed to get more 'performance', since it used
> bluestore in order to store metadata. Or do I need to specify during install
> to use bluestore?
Do the words "enable experimental unrecoverable data corrupting
features
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
> Somehow the PG got corrupted on one of the OSDs and it kept crashing on a
> single
> object.
Vaguely reminds me of the E2BIG from that one issue way-back-when in
Dumpling
(https://www.hastexo.com/resources/hints-and-kinks/fun-extended
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:51:51PM +0100, Florian Haas wrote:
>> Hey, slick. Thanks! Out of curiosity, does the wip branch correctly
>> handle Accept-Encoding: gzip?
> No, Accept-Encoding is NOT presently implemented
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:46 PM, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>>> On 01/26/2016 08:29 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
> On 01/26/2016 08:29 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> we recently worked a bit on running a full static website just on
>> radosgw (akin to
>> http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest
Hi everyone,
we recently worked a bit on running a full static website just on
radosgw (akin to
http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/WebsiteHosting.html),
and didn't find a good how-to writeup out there. So we did a bit of
fiddling with radosgw and HAproxy, and wrote one:
https://www.has
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 8:48 PM, Somnath Roy wrote:
> Hi Yehuda/RGW experts,
>
> I have one cluster with RGW up and running in the customer site.
>
> I did some heavy performance testing on that with CosBench and as a result
> written significant amount of data to showcase performance on that.
>
>
On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 3:10 AM, Haomai Wang wrote:
>> >> >> Hey everyone,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I recently got my hands on a cluster that has been underperforming
>> >> >> in
>> >> >> terms of radosgw throughput, averaging about 60 PUTs/s with 70K
>> >> >> objects where a freshly-installed cluster wi
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 9:15 PM, Ben Hines wrote:
> I'd be curious to compare benchmarks. What size objects are you putting?
As stated earlier, I ran rest-bench with 70KB objects which is a good
approximation of the average object size in the underperforming
system.
> 10gig end to end from clien
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Haomai Wang wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 10:55 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Haomai Wang wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:16 AM, Florian Haas
>> >
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Haomai Wang wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:16 AM, Florian Haas wrote:
>>
>> Hey everyone,
>>
>> I recently got my hands on a cluster that has been underperforming in
>> terms of radosgw throughput, averaging abou
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>
>
> On 21-12-15 10:34, Florian Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>>>>>> Oh, and to answer this part. I didn't do that much experimentation
>>>&
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Florent B wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It seems I had an MDS crash being in standby-replay.
>
> Version is Infernalis, running on Debian Jessie (packaged version).
>
> Log is here (2.5MB) : http://paste.ubuntu.com/14126366/
>
> Has someone information about it ?
Hi Flore
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>>> > Oh, and to answer this part. I didn't do that much experimentation
>>> > unfortunately. I actually am using about 24 index shards per bucket
>>> > currently and we delete each bucket once it hits about a million
>>> > objects. (i
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> I recently got my hands on a cluster that has been underperforming in
> terms of radosgw throughput, averaging about 60 PUTs/s with 70K
> objects where a freshly-installed cluster with near-identical
> conf
Hey everyone,
I recently got my hands on a cluster that has been underperforming in
terms of radosgw throughput, averaging about 60 PUTs/s with 70K
objects where a freshly-installed cluster with near-identical
configuration would do about 250 PUTs/s. (Neither of these values are
what I'd consider
Hey Wido,
On Dec 17, 2015 09:52, "Wido den Hollander" wrote:
>
> On 12/17/2015 06:29 AM, Ben Hines wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Florian Haas > <mailto:flor...@hastexo.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ben & eve
Hi Ben & everyone,
just following up on this one from July, as I don't think there's been
a reply here then.
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 7:37 AM, Ben Hines wrote:
> Anyone have any data on optimal # of shards for a radosgw bucket index?
>
> We've had issues with bucket index contention with a few mil
On 04/22/2015 03:38 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
> On 04/22/2015 03:20 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>> I'm not entirely sure, though, why virStorageBackendRBDCreateImage()
>> enables striping unconditionally; could you explain the reasoning
>> behind that?
>>
>
&g
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
> On 04/22/2015 12:07 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I don't think this has been posted to this list before, so just
>> writing it up so it ends up in the archives.
>>
>> tl
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Daniel Swarbrick
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> With Debian jessie scheduled to be released in a few days on April 25,
> many of us will be thinking of upgrading wheezy based systems to jessie.
> The Ceph packages in upstream Debian repos are version 0.80.7 (i.e.,
> firefly
Hi everyone,
I don't think this has been posted to this list before, so just
writing it up so it ends up in the archives.
tl;dr: Using RBD storage pools with libvirt is currently broken on
Ubuntu trusty (LTS), and any other platform using libvirt 1.2.2.
In libvirt 1.2.2, the rbd_create3 function
through")) {
> /* this is the default */
> } else {
> return -1;
> }
>
> return 0;
> }
>
>
> So rbd_cache is
>
> disabled for cache=directsync|none
>
> and enabled for writet
On 02/27/2015 11:37 AM, Blair Bethwaite wrote:
> Sorry if this is actually documented somewhere,
It is. :)
> but is it possible to
> create and use multiple filesystems on the data data and metadata
> pools? I'm guessing yes, but requires multiple MDSs?
Nope. Every fs needs one data and one meta
On 02/27/2015 01:56 PM, Alexandre DERUMIER wrote:
> Hi,
>
> from qemu rbd.c
>
> if (flags & BDRV_O_NOCACHE) {
> rados_conf_set(s->cluster, "rbd_cache", "false");
> } else {
> rados_conf_set(s->cluster, "rbd_cache", "true");
> }
>
> and
> block.c
>
> int bdrv_parse_ca
Hi everyone,
I always have a bit of trouble wrapping my head around how libvirt seems
to ignore ceph.conf option while qemu/kvm does not, so I thought I'd
ask. Maybe Josh, Wido or someone else can clarify the following.
http://ceph.com/docs/master/rbd/qemu-rbd/ says:
"Important: If you set rbd_c
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 9:19 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> I must confess I'm still not fully understanding this problem and
> don't exactly know where to start digging deeper, but perhaps other
> users have seen this and/or it rings a bell.
>
> Syst
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 12:50 AM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 11:41 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:27 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Mark Nelson wrote:
>> On 02/18/2015 02:19 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey everyone,
>>>
>>> I must confess I'm still not fully understanding this problem
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 11:41 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:28 PM, Oliver Schulz wrote:
>>> Dear Ceph Experts,
>>>
>>> is it possible to define a Ceph user/key with privileges
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:28 PM, Oliver Schulz wrote:
> Dear Ceph Experts,
>
> is it possible to define a Ceph user/key with privileges
> that allow for read-only CephFS access but do not allow
> write or other modifications to the Ceph cluster?
Warning, read this to the end, don't blindly do as
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Mark Nelson wrote:
> On 02/18/2015 02:19 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>>
>> Hey everyone,
>>
>> I must confess I'm still not fully understanding this problem and
>> don't exactly know where to start digging deeper, but perh
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Brian Rak wrote:
>> What does your crushmap look like (ceph osd getcrushmap -o
>> /tmp/crushmap; crushtool -d /tmp/crushmap)? Does your placement logic
>> prevent Ceph from selecting an OSD for the third replica?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Florian
>
>
> I have 5 hosts, and i
Hey everyone,
I must confess I'm still not fully understanding this problem and
don't exactly know where to start digging deeper, but perhaps other
users have seen this and/or it rings a bell.
System info: Ceph giant on CentOS 7; approx. 240 OSDs, 6 pools using 2
different rulesets where the prob
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Brian Rak wrote:
> We're running ceph version 0.87 (c51c8f9d80fa4e0168aa52685b8de40e42758578),
> and seeing this:
>
> HEALTH_WARN 1 pgs degraded; 1 pgs stuck degraded; 1 pgs stuck unclean; 1 pgs
> stuck undersized; 1 pgs undersized
> pg 4.2af is stuck unclean for 7
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 9:48 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 11:19 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>>>> Hello everyone,
>>>>
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 11:19 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I'm seeing some OSD behavior that I consider unexpected; perhaps
>> someone can shed some insight.
>>
>> Ce
Hello everyone,
I'm seeing some OSD behavior that I consider unexpected; perhaps
someone can shed some insight.
Ceph giant (0.87.0), osd max backfills and osd recovery max active
both set to 1.
Please take a moment to look at the following "ceph health detail" screen dump:
HEALTH_WARN 14 pgs ba
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
> On 11/28/2014 03:22 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>>> On 11/28/2014 01:04 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>&g
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
> On 11/28/2014 01:04 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I'd like to come back to a discussion from 2012 (thread at
>> http://marc.info/?l=ceph-devel&m=134808745719233) to estimate the
>
Just thought of one other thing; allow me to insert that below.
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Florian Haas wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'd like to come back to a discussion from 2012 (thread at
> http://marc.info/?l=ceph-devel&m=134808745719233) to estimate the
> expecte
Hi everyone,
I'd like to come back to a discussion from 2012 (thread at
http://marc.info/?l=ceph-devel&m=134808745719233) to estimate the
expected MDS memory consumption from file metadata caching. I am certain
the following is full of untested assumptions, some of which are
probably inaccurate, s
Hi everyone,
been trying to get to the bottom of this for a few days; thought I'd
take this to the list to see if someone had insight to share.
Situation: Ceph 0.87 (Giant) cluster with approx. 250 OSDs. One set of
OSD nodes with just spinners put into one CRUSH ruleset assigned to a
"spinner" po
Hi Sage,
sorry to be late to this thread; I just caught this one as I was
reviewing the Giant release notes. A few questions below:
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 8:16 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> [...]
> * ACLs: implemented, tested for kernel client. not implemented for
> ceph-fuse.
> [...]
> * samba VFS
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
