Hi,
I ran cephfs-journal-tool to inspect journal 12 hours ago - it's still
running. Or... it didn't crush yet, although I don't see any output from
it. Is it normal behaviour?
Thanks for help.
Andrzej
W dniu 2015-08-26 o 15:49, Gregory Farnum pisze:
There is a cephfs-journal-tool that I bel
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:52 PM, John Spray wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Dan van der Ster wrote:
>> Hi Wido,
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>>> I'm sending pool statistics to Graphite
>>
>> We're doing the same -- stripping invalid chars as needed
On 08/26/2015 05:17 PM, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:26 AM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> It's something which has been 'bugging' me for some time now. Why are
>>> RGW pools prefixed with a period?
>
Hi friends:
I put a file(ceph_0.94.2-1.tar.gz, size 23812K) to ceph:
ceph@node110:~$ s3cmd ls
2015-08-27 06:13 s3://bkt-key
ceph@node110:~$ s3cmd put ceph_0.94.2-1.tar.gz s3://bkt-key
WARNING: Module python-magic is not available. Guessing MIME types based on
file extensions.
ceph_0.94.2-1.tar.
On 08/26/2015 04:33 PM, Dan van der Ster wrote:
> Hi Wido,
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>> I'm sending pool statistics to Graphite
>
> We're doing the same -- stripping invalid chars as needed -- and I
> would guess that lots of people have written similar json
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
> On 08/26/2015 04:33 PM, Dan van der Ster wrote:
>> Hi Wido,
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>>> I'm sending pool statistics to Graphite
>>
>> We're doing the same -- stripping invalid chars as needed -
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Andrzej Łukawski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I ran cephfs-journal-tool to inspect journal 12 hours ago - it's still
> running. Or... it didn't crush yet, although I don't see any output from it.
> Is it normal behaviour?
Your cluster is severely damaged, at the RADOS level.
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
> On 08/26/2015 05:17 PM, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:26 AM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
Hi,
It's something which has been 'bugging' me
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Goncalo Borges
wrote:
> Hey guys...
>
> 1./ I have a simple question regarding the appearance of degraded PGs.
> First, for reference:
>
> a. I am working with 0.94.2
>
> b. I have 32 OSDs distributed in 4 servers, meaning that I have 8 OSD per
> server.
>
> c. Our
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:11 AM, John Spray wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Andrzej Łukawski
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I ran cephfs-journal-tool to inspect journal 12 hours ago - it's still
>> running. Or... it didn't crush yet, although I don't see any output from it.
>> Is it normal beh
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Simon Hallam wrote:
> The clients are:
> [root@gridnode50 ~]# uname -a
> Linux gridnode50 4.0.8-200.fc21.x86_64 #1 SMP Fri Jul 10 21:09:54 UTC 2015
> x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
> [root@gridnode50 ~]# ceph -v
> ceph version 0.80.10 (ea6c958c38df1216bf95c927f1
Hi,
I wanted to know how RGW users are backing up the bucket contents , so that in
the disaster scenario user can recreate the setup.
I know there is geo replication support but it could be an expensive
proposition.
I wanted to know if there is any simple solution like plugging in traditional
ba
This Hammer point release fixes a critical (though rare) data corruption
bug that could be triggered when logs are rotated via SIGHUP. It also
fixes a range of other important bugs in the OSD, monitor, RGW, RGW, and
CephFS.
All v0.94.x Hammer users are strongly encouraged to upgrade.
UPGRADING
Hello Ceph Users,
yesterday I had a defective Gbic in 1 node of my 10 node ceph cluster.
The Gbic was working somehow but had 50% packet-loss. Some packets went
through, some did not.
What happend that the whole cluster did not service requests in time, there
were lots of timeouts and so on
un
Hi all,
I'm planning to deploy a new Ceph cluster with IB FDR 56Gb/s and I've
the following HW:
*3x MON Servers:*
2x Intel Xeon E5-2600@v3 8C
256GB RAM
1xIB FRD ADPT-DP (two ports for PUB network)
1xGB ADPT-DP
Disk Layout:
SOFT-RAID:
SCSI1 (0,0,0) (sda) - 120.0 GB ATA IN
Just a reminder that our Performance Ceph Tech Talk with Mark Nelson
will be starting in 1 hour.
If you are unable to attend there will be a recording posted on the
Ceph YouTube channel and linked from the page at:
http://ceph.com/ceph-tech-talks/
--
Best Regards,
Patrick McGarry
Director Ce
Some comments inline.
A lot of it depends on your workload, but I'd say you almost certainly need
higher-grade SSDs. You can save money on memory.
What will be the role of this cluster? VM disks? Object storage? Streaming?...
Jan
> On 27 Aug 2015, at 17:56, German Anders wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
Hi Jan,
Thanks for responding the email, regarding the cluster usage, we are
going to used it for non-relational databases, Cassandra, mongoDBs and
other apps, so we need that this cluster response well to intense io apps,
it's going to be connected to HP enclosures with IB FDR also, and mapped
As far as I know the only feeds we have available are for the blog and
the planet.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 11:59 PM, Matt Taylor wrote:
> On that note in regards to watching /cephdays for details, the RSS feed
> 404's!
>
> http://ceph.com/cephdays/feed/
>
> Regards,
> Matt.
>
> On 27/08/2015 02:
In that case you need fair IOPS and high throughput. Go with S3610 or the
Samsungs (or something else that people there can recommend, but for the love
of god don't save on drives :)). It's easier to stick to one type of drives and
not complicate things.
I would also recommend you add one stora
I'm currently running Giant in my cluster, and there are a number of things
in Hammer that look promising. Today's release announcement for Hammer
reminded me to go take a look at it, and I'm getting mixed information
about whether or not it is considered safe production yet or not. The main
ceph.c
Quentin,
Red Hat Ceph Storage 1.3 is based upon Hammer. I guess you can take away
from that that we at Red Hat think it's production ready :-)
Ian
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 10:30 AM, Quentin Hartman <
qhart...@direwolfdigital.com> wrote:
> I'm currently running Giant in my cluster, and there are
Hey cephers,
Just wanted to start sharing this so that people could help us
generate interest. Sage will be answering questions via a Reddit AMA
on Wednesday 02 September from 2-4p EDT.
You can see him in the /r/iama calender in the margin on the main
page: https://www.reddit.com/r/iama
If anyon
Add to your Gcal here:
https://www.google.com/calendar/render?eid=Yzh0cDdiOWVsYjVyZXBlZmVocjAxdTNrMzggYW1hdmVyaWZ5QG0&ctz=America/New_York&pli=1&sf=true&output=xml#eventpage_6
Ian
> On Aug 27, 2015, at 10:36, Patrick McGarry wrote:
>
> Hey cephers,
>
> Just wanted to start sharing this so that
Well, assuming you guys are cleaving to the normal Redhat ethos, then that
would be a pretty ringing endorsement for production readiness.
Thanks!
QH
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Ian Colle wrote:
> Quentin,
>
> Red Hat Ceph Storage 1.3 is based upon Hammer. I guess you can take away
> fro
I already had the SC3510... so I would stick with those :S...the SC 3700
were a little bit high on price and the manager didn't approved that... not
my decision...unfortunately.
Also I see very hard to add at the moment another node,.. so maybe I can
start with 6 OSD instead of 8, and leave those
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
The OSDs should be marked down within about 30 seconds. Can you
provide additional information such as ceph version and the ceph.conf
file.
Thanks,
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
This has been discussed a few times. The consensus seems to be to make
sure error rates of NICs or other such metrics are included in your
monitoring solution. It would also be good to preform periodic network
tests like a full size ping with nofrag
Don't kick out the node, just deal with it gracefully and without
interruption... if the IO reached the quorum number of OSDs then there's no
need to block anymore, just queue it. Reads can be mirrored or retried (much
quicker, because making writes idempotent, ordered and async is pretty hard a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 10:25 AM, Jan Schermer wrote:
> Some comments inline.
> A lot of it depends on your workload, but I'd say you almost certainly need
> higher-grade SSDs. You can save money on memory.
>
> What will be the role of this clust
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
I know writing to min_size as sync and size-min_size as async has been
discussed before and would help here. From what I understand required
a lot of code changes and goes against the strong consistency model of
Ceph. I'm not sure if it will be imple
Hello everyone,
Reading the documentation about cephfs i found this notice in the "Create a
Ceph filesystem" section
"The Ceph command line now includes commands for creating and removing file
systems, but at present only one filesystem may exist at a time."
I am fairly new to ceph, and was tryin
> On 27 Aug 2015, at 20:57, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 10:25 AM, Jan Schermer wrote:
>> Some comments inline.
>> A lot of it depends on your workload, but I'd say you almost certainly need
>> higher-grade SSD
Well, there's no other way to get reliable performance and SLAs compared to
traditional storage when what you work with is commodity hardware in a mesh-y
configuration.
And we do like the idea of killing the traditional storage, right? I think 80s
called already and wanted their SAN back...
Jan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Jan Schermer wrote:
>
>> On 27 Aug 2015, at 20:57, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA256
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 10:25 AM, Jan Schermer wrote:
>>> Some comme
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
+1
:)
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Jan Schermer wrote:
Well, there's no other way to get reliable performance and SLAs
compared to traditiona
Thanks a lot Robert and Jan for the comments about the available and
possible disk layouts. Is there any advice from the point of view of
configuration? any tunable parameters, crush algorithm?
Thanks a lot,
Best regards,
*German*
2015-08-27 16:37 GMT-03:00 Robert LeBlanc :
> -BEGIN PGP SI
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
I suggest setting logging to 0/5 on everything. Depending on your
desire for reliability and availability, you may want to change your
pool min_size/size to 2/4 and adjust your CRUSH map to include rack.
Then instruct CRUSH to place two copies in eac
> On 27 Aug 2015, at 21:37, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Jan Schermer wrote:
> >
> >> On 27 Aug 2015, at 20:57, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> >>
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >> Hash: SHA256
> >>
> >>
Just two little notes here :) below
> On 27 Aug 2015, at 21:58, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> I suggest setting logging to 0/5 on everything. Depending on your desire for
> reliability and availability, you may want to change your pool min_size
Hello Brad,
Thank you for your response. Looks like the command is undefined.
U _ZN5Mutex4LockEb
U _ZN5Mutex6UnlockEv
U _ZN5MutexC1ERKSsbbbP11CephContext
U _ZN5MutexD1Ev
Thanks,
Aakanksha
-Original Message-
From: Brad Hubbard
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Carlos Raúl Laguna
wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Reading the documentation about cephfs i found this notice in the "Create a
> Ceph filesystem" section
> "The Ceph command line now includes commands for creating and removing file
> systems, but at present only one f
Hi all,
It appears that OSD daemons only very slowly free RAM after an extended period
of an unhealthy cluster (shuffling PGs around).
Prior to a power outage (and recovery) around July 25th, the amount of RAM
used was fairly constant, at most 10GB (out of 24GB). You can see in the
attached P
Wow i do this every other day with nfs, i can't evenThanks for your
answer. Regards
2015-08-27 16:52 GMT-04:00 John Spray :
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Carlos Raúl Laguna
> wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > Reading the documentation about cephfs i found this notice in the
> "Create a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Jan Schermer wrote:
> S3500 is faster than S3700? I can compare 3700 x 3510 x 3610 tomorrow but I'd
> be very surprised if the S3500 had a _sustained_ throughput better than 36xx
> or 37xx. Were you comparing that
Hi All,
I would like to introduce NodeFabric - a custom CentOS Atomic Host image
- which enables turnkey Ceph deployments.
It can be run on any virtual or physical infrastructure: Amazon EC2
cloud, Openstack and VMware private clouds, on top of popular
hypervisors (VirtualBox, Parallels, KVM,
Hey Greg...
Thanks for the reply.
At this point the cluster recovered, so I am no longer in that
situation. I'll try to go back, reproduce and post the pg query for one
of those degraded PGs later on.
Cheers
Goncalo
On 08/27/2015 10:02 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 2
- Original Message -
> From: "Aakanksha Pudipeddi-SSI"
> To: "Brad Hubbard"
> Cc: "Jason Dillaman" , ceph-us...@ceph.com
> Sent: Friday, 28 August, 2015 6:15:12 AM
> Subject: RE: [ceph-users] Rados: Undefined symbol error
>
> Hello Brad,
>
> Thank you for your response. Looks like the c
ceph version：0.94.2
ceph.conf:
[global]
fsid = 51b9437c-b49d-460c-b919-4bd86cc4d97d
mon_initial_members = ubuntu2, ubuntu3, ubuntu4
mon_host = 192.168.33.182,192.168.33.183,192.168.33.184
auth_cluster_required = cephx
auth_service_required = cephx
auth_client_required = cephx
filestore_xattr_use_o
Yes, we already notice this, and have PR to fix partial of this I
think https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/5451/files
On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 4:59 AM, Chad William Seys
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It appears that OSD daemons only very slowly free RAM after an extended period
> of an unhealthy cluster (sh
Hey Andrzej...
As Jan replied, I would first try to recover what I can from the ceph
cluster. For the time being, I would not be concerned with cephfs.
I would also backup the current OSDs so that, if something goes wrong, I
can go back to the current state.
The recover of the cluster would
Slow memory release could also be because of tcmalloc. Tcmalloc doesn't release
the memory the moment application issue a 'delete' but it cached it inside for
future use.
If it is not a production cluster and you have spare time to reproduce this, I
would suggest to build Ceph code with jemalloc
- Original Message -
> From: "Brad Hubbard"
> To: "Aakanksha Pudipeddi-SSI"
> Cc: ceph-us...@ceph.com
> Sent: Friday, 28 August, 2015 10:54:04 AM
> Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Rados: Undefined symbol error
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Aakanksha Pudipeddi-SSI"
> > To: "Brad
53 matches
Mail list logo
