[ceph-users] Replication vs Erasure Coding with only 2 elements in the failure-domain.

Hi all, We have (only) 2 separate "rooms" (crush bucket) and would like to build a cluster being able to handle the complete loss of one room. First idea would be to use replication: -> As we read the mail thread "2x replication: A BIG warning", we would chose a replication size of 3. -> We

Re: [ceph-users] RBD device on Erasure Coded Pool with kraken and Ubuntu Xenial.

Am Dienstag, den 07.03.2017, 11:14 +0100 schrieb Ilya Dryomov: On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Francois Blondel mailto:fblon...@intelliad.de>> wrote: Hi all, I have been triyng to use RBD devices on a Erasure Coded data-pool on Ubuntu Xenial. I created my block device "blockec2&

[ceph-users] RBD device on Erasure Coded Pool with kraken and Ubuntu Xenial.

Hi all, I have been triyng to use RBD devices on a Erasure Coded data-pool on Ubuntu Xenial. I created my block device "blockec2" with : rbd create blockec2 --size 300G --data-pool ecpool --image-feature layering,data-pool (same issue with "rbd create blockec2 --size 300G --data-pool ecpool" )

[ceph-users] High ops/s with kRBD and "--object-size 32M"

Hi *, I am currently testing different scenarios to try to optimize sequential read and write speeds using Kernel RBD. I have two block devices created with : rbd create block1 --size 500G --pool rbd --image-feature layering rbd create block132m --size 500G --pool rbd --image-feature layerin