On 11 September 2014 08:47, John Spray wrote:
> I do think this is something we could think about building a tool for:
> lots of people will have comparatively tiny quantities of metadata so
> full dumps would be a nice thing to have in our back pockets. Reminds
> me of the way Lustre people used
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 9:05 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>> Related, given there is no fsck, how would one go about backing up the
>> metadata in order to facilitate DR? Is there even a way for that to
>> make sense given the decoupling of data & metadata pools...?
>
> Uh, depends on the kind of DR
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 6:10 PM, Blair Bethwaite
wrote:
> Hi Sage,
>
> Thanks for weighing into this directly and allaying some concerns.
>
> It would be good to get a better understanding about where the rough
> edges are - if deployers have some knowledge of those then they can be
> worked around
Hi Sage,
Thanks for weighing into this directly and allaying some concerns.
It would be good to get a better understanding about where the rough
edges are - if deployers have some knowledge of those then they can be
worked around to some extent. E.g., for our use-case it may be that
whilst Inktan
On Tue, 9 Sep 2014, Blair Bethwaite wrote:
> > Personally, I think you?re very brave to consider running 2PB of ZoL
> > on RBD. If I were you I would seriously evaluate the CephFS option. It
> > used to be on the roadmap for ICE 2.0 coming out this fall, though I
> > noticed its not there anymor
