Jack,
to be correct all kudos shoud go to David Turner since this was his
comment.
I just wanted to thank you and him for taking the time to answer my
initial question.
Kind regards,
G.
Thanks Georgios for pointing out my mistake: I can still perform
reads
only because of IO cache on th
Thanks Georgios for pointing out my mistake: I can still perform reads
only because of IO cache on the host .. so the pool really block all
requests
On 02/24/2018 01:45 PM, Georgios Dimitrakakis wrote:
>> The pool will not actually go read only. All read and write requests
>> will block until both
Excellent!
Thank youd David and Jack for your time!
Regards,
G.
The pool will not actually go read only. All read and write requests
will block until both osds are back up. If I were you, I would use
min_size=2 and change it to 1 temporarily if needed to do maintenance
or troubleshooting wher
The pool will not actually go read only. All read and write requests will
block until both osds are back up. If I were you, I would use min_size=2
and change it to 1 temporarily if needed to do maintenance or
troubleshooting where down time is not an option.
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018, 5:31 PM Georgios
All right! Thank you very much Jack!
The way I understand this is that it's not necessarily a bad thing. I
mean as long as it doesn't harm any data or
cannot cause any other issue.
Unfortunately my scenario consists of only two OSDs therefore there is
a replication factor of 2 and min_size=1.
If min_size == size, a single OSD failure will place your pool read only
On 02/22/2018 11:06 PM, Georgios Dimitrakakis wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I would like to know if there are additional risks when running CEPH
> with "Min Size" equal to "Replicated Size" for a given pool.
>
> What are the drawb
Dear all,
I would like to know if there are additional risks when running CEPH
with "Min Size" equal to "Replicated Size" for a given pool.
What are the drawbacks and what could be go wrong in such a scenario?
Best regards,
G.
___
ceph-users mailin
