On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
>> 3. During deep scrub of an object with 2 replicas, suppose the checksum is
>> different for the two objects -- which object wins? (I.e. if you store the
>> checksum locally, this is trivial since the consistency of objects can be
>> evaluated
On Wed, 16 Oct 2013, ja...@peacon.co.uk wrote:
> Does Ceph log anywhere corrected(/caught) silent corruption - would be
> interesting to know how much a problem this is, in a large scale deployment.
> Something to gather in the league table mentioned at the London Ceph day?
It is logged, and cause
-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com
> [mailto:ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com] On Behalf Of ja...@peacon.co.uk
> Sent: 16 October 2013 20:06
> To: ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> Subject: Re: [ceph-users] bit correctness and checksumming
>
> Very interesting link. I don't suppos
Thank you Sage for the thorough answer.
It just occurred to me to also ask about the gateway. The docs explain that one
can supply content-md5 during an object PUT (which I assume is verified by the
RGW), but does a GET respond with the ETag md5? (Sorry, I don't have a gateway
running at the mo
Sent: 16 October 2013 18:54
To: ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
Subject: Re: [ceph-users] bit correctness and checksumming
Does Ceph log anywhere corrected(/caught) silent corruption - would
be interesting to know how much a problem this is, in a large scale
deployment. Something to gather in the le
Tim
> -Original Message-
> From: ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com
> [mailto:ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com] On Behalf Of ja...@peacon.co.uk
> Sent: 16 October 2013 18:54
> To: ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> Subject: Re: [ceph-users] bit correctness and checksumming
>
&
Does Ceph log anywhere corrected(/caught) silent corruption - would be
interesting to know how much a problem this is, in a large scale
deployment. Something to gather in the league table mentioned at the
London Ceph day?
Just thinking out-loud (please shout me down...) - if the FS itself
On Wed, 16 Oct 2013, Dan Van Der Ster wrote:
> Hi all,
> There has been some confusion the past couple days at the CHEP
> conference during conversations about Ceph and protection from bit flips
> or other subtle data corruption. Can someone please summarise the
> current state of data integrity
