Hi all,
I've set up a ceph cluster using this playbook:
https://github.com/ceph/ceph-ansible
I've configured in my hosts list
[mdss]
hostname1
hostname2
I now need to remove this MDS from the cluster.
The only document I found is this:
http://www.sebastien-han.fr/blog/2012/07/04/remove-a-m
Hi Loic,
this is the content of our ceph.conf
[global]
fsid = 719f14b2-7475-4b25-8c5f-3ffbcf594d13
mon_initial_members = ceph1, ceph2, ceph3
mon_host = 192.168.10.107,192.168.10.108,192.168.10.109
auth_cluster_required = cephx
auth_service_required = cephx
auth_client_required = cephx
filestore_x
Hello,
I also had to remove the MDSs on a Giant test cluster a few days ago,
and stumbled upon the same problems.
Le 24/02/2015 09:58, ceph-users a écrit :
Hi all,
I've set up a ceph cluster using this playbook:
https://github.com/ceph/ceph-ansible
I've configured in my hosts list
[mdss]
ho
- Mail original -
> I have a Cluster of 3 hosts, running Debian wheezy and Backports Kernel
> 3.16.0-0.bpo.4-amd64.
> For testing I did a
> ~# ceph osd out 20
> from a clean state.
> Ceph starts rebalancing, watching ceph -w one sees changing pgs stuck unclean
> to get up and then go down
On 24/02/2015 09:58, Stephan Seitz wrote:
> Hi Loic,
>
> this is the content of our ceph.conf
>
> [global]
> fsid = 719f14b2-7475-4b25-8c5f-3ffbcf594d13
> mon_initial_members = ceph1, ceph2, ceph3
> mon_host = 192.168.10.107,192.168.10.108,192.168.10.109
> auth_cluster_required = cephx
> auth_s
Sorry,
forgot to mention that I'm running Ceph 0.87 on Centos 7.
On 24/02/2015 10:20, Xavier Villaneau wrote:
Hello,
I also had to remove the MDSs on a Giant test cluster a few days ago,
and stumbled upon the same problems.
Le 24/02/2015 09:58, ceph-users a écrit :
Hi all,
I've set up a ceph
On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 11:17:22 +0100 Loic Dachary wrote:
>
>
> On 24/02/2015 09:58, Stephan Seitz wrote:
> > Hi Loic,
> >
> > this is the content of our ceph.conf
> >
> > [global]
> > fsid = 719f14b2-7475-4b25-8c5f-3ffbcf594d13
> > mon_initial_members = ceph1, ceph2, ceph3
> > mon_host = 192.168
On 24/02/2015 12:00, Christian Balzer wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 11:17:22 +0100 Loic Dachary wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 24/02/2015 09:58, Stephan Seitz wrote:
>>> Hi Loic,
>>>
>>> this is the content of our ceph.conf
>>>
>>> [global]
>>> fsid = 719f14b2-7475-4b25-8c5f-3ffbcf594d13
>>> mon_initial_me
Hi all,
installing an OSD on an LVM volume seems not to be supported by the current
'ceph-deploy osd' or 'ceph-disk prepare' tools. Therefore I tried to do it
manually as suggested here:
http://eturnerx.blogspot.de/2014/08/how-i-added-my-lvm-volumes-as-osds-in.html
TL;DR, the process is:
- creat
Hello ceph-users,
I am currently making tests on a small cluster, and Cache Tiering is one
of those tests. The cluster runs Ceph 0.87 Giant on three Ubuntu 14.04
servers with the 3.16.0 kernel, for a total of 8 OSD and 1 MON.
Since there are no SSDs in those servers, I am testing Cache Tierin
I'll take a shot at answering this:
Operations are atomic in the sense that there are no partial failures.
Additionally, access to an object should appear to be serialized. So, two
in-flight operations A and B will be applied in either A,B or B,A order. If
ordering is important (e.g. the operat
On 24/02/2015 12:49, Joerg Henne wrote:
This seems to work, however, the disks are not listed by 'ceph-disk list'.
Right. ceph-disk uses GPID partition labels to identify the disks.
Is there a recommended way of running an OSD on top of a LVM volume? What
are the pros and cons of the approac
2015-02-24 14:05 GMT+01:00 John Spray :
>
> I imagine that without proper partition labels you'll also not get the
> benefit of e.g. the udev magic
> that allows plugging OSDs in/out of different hosts. More generally
> you'll just be in a rather non standard configuration that will confuse
> any
Sorry,
forgot to mention that I'm running Ceph 0.87 on Centos 7.
On 24/02/2015 10:20, Xavier Villaneau wrote:
Hello,
I also had to remove the MDSs on a Giant test cluster a few days ago,
and stumbled upon the same problems.
Le 24/02/2015 09:58, ceph-users a écrit :
Hi all,
I've set up a ceph
On 24/02/2015 09:20, Xavier Villaneau wrote:
[root@z-srv-m-cph01 ceph]# ceph mds stat
e1: 0/0/0 up
1. question: why the MDS are not stopped?
This is just confusing formatting. 0/0/0 means 0 up, 0 in, max_mds=0.
This status indicates that you have no filesystem at all.
2. When I try to
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 6:21 AM, Xavier Villaneau
wrote:
> Hello ceph-users,
>
> I am currently making tests on a small cluster, and Cache Tiering is one of
> those tests. The cluster runs Ceph 0.87 Giant on three Ubuntu 14.04 servers
> with the 3.16.0 kernel, for a total of 8 OSD and 1 MON.
>
> S
Hello Noah,
In may case the ordering is importante and I seen that librados have an lock
implementation which I’ll use that on my implementation. Thanks for your help.
Regards.
Italo Santos
http://italosantos.com.br/
On Tuesday, February 24, 2015 at 12:52, Noah Watkins wrote:
> I'll take
We have had good luck with letting udev do it's thing on CentOS7.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 7:46 PM, Anthony Alba wrote:
> Hi Cephers,
>
> What is your "best practice" for starting up OSDs?
>
> I am trying to determine the most robust technique on CentOS 7 where I
> have too much choice:
>
> udev/g
A while ago, I managed to have this working but this was really tricky.
See my comment here:
https://github.com/ceph/ceph-ansible/issues/9#issuecomment-37127128
One use case I had was a system with 2 SSD for the OS and a couple of OSDs.
Both SSD were in RAID1 and the system was configured with lv
Hi All
Just recently joined the list and have been reading/learning about ceph for
the past few months. Overall it looks to be well suited to our cloud
platform but I have stumbled across a few worrying items that hopefully you
guys can clarify the status of.
Reading through various mailing list
How can I remove the 2nd MDS:
# ceph mds dump
dumped mdsmap epoch 72
epoch 72
flags 0
created 2015-02-24 15:55:10.631958
modified2015-02-24 17:58:49.400841
tableserver 0
root0
session_timeout 60
session_autoclose 300
max_file_size 1099511627776
last_failure62
last_f
On 02/24/2015 04:21 PM, Kevin Walker wrote:
Hi All
Just recently joined the list and have been reading/learning about ceph
for the past few months. Overall it looks to be well suited to our cloud
platform but I have stumbled across a few worrying items that hopefully
you guys can clarify the sta
Hi Mark
Thanks for the info, 22k is not bad, but still massively below what a pcie ssd
can achieve. Care to expand on why the write IOPS are so low? Was this with a
separate RAM disk pcie device or SLC SSD for the journal?
That fragmentation percentage looks good. We are considering using just
Hi Kevin,
Writes are probably limited by a combination of locks, concurrent
O_DSYNC journal writes, fsyncs, etc. The tests I mentioned were with
both the OSD and the OSD journal on the same PCIe SSD. Others have
looked into this in more detail than I have so might be able to chime
in with
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Chris Murray wrote:
> ... Trying to send again after reporting bounce backs to dreamhost ...
> ... Trying to send one more time after seeing mails come through the
> list today ...
>
> Hi all,
>
> First off, I should point out that this is a 'small cluster' issue a
On Wed, 25 Feb 2015 02:50:59 +0400 Kevin Walker wrote:
> Hi Mark
>
> Thanks for the info, 22k is not bad, but still massively below what a
> pcie ssd can achieve. Care to expand on why the write IOPS are so low?
Aside from what Mark mentioned in his reply there's also latency to be
considered in
I have tried to install ceph using ceph-deploy but sgdisk seems to
have too many issues so I did a manual install. After mkfs.btrfs on
the disks and journals and mounted them I then tried to start the osds
which failed. The first error was:
#/etc/init.d/ceph start osd.0
/etc/init.d/ceph: osd.0 not
On 02/24/2015 09:06 PM, Loic Dachary wrote:
On 24/02/2015 12:00, Christian Balzer wrote:
On Tue, 24 Feb 2015 11:17:22 +0100 Loic Dachary wrote:
On 24/02/2015 09:58, Stephan Seitz wrote:
Hi Loic,
this is the content of our ceph.conf
[global]
fsid = 719f14b2-7475-4b25-8c5f-3ffbcf594d13
mo
Hi Christian
We are just looking at options at this stage.
Using a hardware RAM disk for the journal is the same concept as the SolidFire
guys, who are also using XFS (at least they were last time I crossed paths with
a customer using SolidFire) and from my experiences with ZFS, using a RAM ba
I compare the applied commits between 0.80.7 and 0.80.8 , then I focus on
this：
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/711a7e6f81983ff2091caa0f232af914a04a041c?diff=unified#diff-9bcd2f7647a2bd574b6ebe6baf8e61b3
this commits seems take waitfor_read flushed out of the while cycle, maybe
this cause th
Hello Kevin,
On Wed, 25 Feb 2015 07:55:34 +0400 Kevin Walker wrote:
> Hi Christian
>
> We are just looking at options at this stage.
>
Never a bad thing to do.
> Using a hardware RAM disk for the journal is the same concept as the
> SolidFire guys, who are also using XFS (at least they were
31 matches
Mail list logo
