On Apr 29, 2016 11:46 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>
> On Friday, April 29, 2016, Edward Huyer mailto:erh...@rit.edu>>
wrote:
This is more of a "why" than a "can I/should I" question.
The Ceph block device quickstart says (if I interpret it correctly) not to use
a physical machine as both a Ceph
On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Oliver Dzombic wrote:
> Hi,
>
> sure.
>
> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/13643
Thanks!!
I've totally missed that -;
>
> --
> Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best regards
>
> Oliver Dzombic
> IP-Interactive
>
> mailto:i...@ip-interactive.de
>
> Anschrift:
>
> IP Inte
Hi,
sure.
http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/13643
--
Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best regards
Oliver Dzombic
IP-Interactive
mailto:i...@ip-interactive.de
Anschrift:
IP Interactive UG ( haftungsbeschraenkt )
Zum Sonnenberg 1-3
63571 Gelnhausen
HRB 93402 beim Amtsgericht Hanau
Geschäftsführung:
On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 5:32 PM, Oliver Dzombic wrote:
> Hi,
>
> there is a memory allocation bug, at least in hammer.
>
Could you give us any pointer?
> Mouting an rbd volume as a block device on a ceph node might run you
> into that. Then your mount wont work, and you will have to restart the
Hi,
there is a memory allocation bug, at least in hammer.
Mouting an rbd volume as a block device on a ceph node might run you
into that. Then your mount wont work, and you will have to restart the
OSD daemon(s).
Its generally not a perfectly good idea.
Better use a dedicated client for the mou
On Friday, April 29, 2016, Edward Huyer wrote:
> This is more of a "why" than a "can I/should I" question.
>
> The Ceph block device quickstart says (if I interpret it correctly) not to
> use a physical machine as both a Ceph RBD client and a node for hosting
> OSDs or other Ceph services.
>
> Is
It can be done.
However, with the node hosting OSDs already has enough work to do and you will
run into performance issues.
It's been, and can be done, but you are better off to not do so.
//Tu
_
From: Edward Huyer
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 11:30 AM
Subject
