Hello,
On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 07:34:16 +0200 Loic Dachary wrote:
> Hi Christian,
>
> Interesting use case :-) How many OSDs / hosts do you have ? And how are
> they connected together ?
>
If you look far back in the archives you'd find that design.
And of course there will be a lot of "I told you
Hi Christian,
On 07.10.2015 09:04, Christian Balzer wrote:
>
> ...
>
> My main suspect for the excessive slowness are actually the Toshiba DT
> type drives used.
> We only found out after deployment that these can go into a zombie mode
> (20% of their usual performance for ~8 hours if not perma
Hello everybody,
we are discussing experimental installation ceph cluster under
Scientific Linux 7.x (or CentOS 7.x).
I wonder if it is possible that in one ceph cluster are used different
operating platforms (e.g. CentOS, Ubuntu) ?
Does anybody have information/experience on the topic ?
Many t
Pretty unusual but not necessarily a problem -- if anything didn't
work I think we'd consider it a bug. Discussions about getting the
uids/gids to match on OSD filesystems when running as non-root were
the last time I heard people chatting about this (and even then, only
matters if you move drives
We recently mixed CentOS/Ubuntu OSDs and ran into some issues, but I don't
think those have anything to do with the distros but more likely with the fact
that we ran -grsec kernel there.
YMMV. I don't think there's a reason it shouldn't work. It will be much harder
to debug and tune, though if y
Hi,
Can anyone tell if deep scrub is done using O_DIRECT flag or not? I'm
not able to verify that in source code.
If not would it be possible to add such feature (maybe config option) to
help keeping Linux page cache in better shape?
Thanks,
--
PS
_
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
We just transitioned a pre-production cluster from CentOS7 to Debian
Jessie without any issues. I rebooted half of the nodes (6 nodes) on
day, let it sit for 24 hours and then rebooted the other half the next
day. This was running 0.94.3. I'll be tra
It's not, but it would not be ahrd to do this. There are fadvise-style
hints being passed down that could trigger O_DIRECT reads in this case.
That may not be the best choice, though--it won't use data that happens
to be in cache and it'll also throw it out..
On Wed, 7 Oct 2015, Pawe? Sadowsk
Hello Udo,
On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 11:40:11 +0200 Udo Lembke wrote:
> Hi Christian,
>
> On 07.10.2015 09:04, Christian Balzer wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > My main suspect for the excessive slowness are actually the Toshiba DT
> > type drives used.
> > We only found out after deployment that these
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
> It's not, but it would not be ahrd to do this. There are fadvise-style
> hints being passed down that could trigger O_DIRECT reads in this case.
> That may not be the best choice, though--it won't use data that happens
> to be in cache and it'll
John Spray пишет:
[...]
There are part of log for restarted mds debug 7 (without standby-replplay, but
IMHO no matter):
(PS How [un]safe multiple mds in current hammer? Now I try & temporary work with
"set_max_mds 3", but 1 mds shutdown still too laggy for related client anymore.
And anymor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
We forgot to upload the ceph.log yesterday. It is there now.
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE
There would be a benefit to doing fadvise POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED after
deep-scrub reads for objects not recently accessed by clients.
I see the NewStore objectstore sometimes using the O_DIRECT flag for
writes. This concerns me because the open(2) man pages says:
"Applications should avoid m
On Wed, 7 Oct 2015, David Zafman wrote:
>
> There would be a benefit to doing fadvise POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED after
> deep-scrub reads for objects not recently accessed by clients.
Yeah, it's the 'except for stuff already in cache' part that we don't do
(and the kernel doesn't give us a good interf
Hi Selcuk,
Which version of ceph did you upgrade from to Hammer (0.94)?
--Narendra
From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com] On Behalf Of Selcuk
TUNC
Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2015 12:41 AM
To: ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
Subject: [ceph-users] leveldb compaction error
hello
The failing message looks like following:
What would be the root cause ?
=== osd.0 ===
failed: 'timeout 30 /usr/bin/ceph -c /etc/ceph/ceph.conf --name=osd.0
--keyring=/var/lib/ceph/osd/ceph-0/keyring osd crush create-or-move -- 0 1.74
host=certstor-18 root=default'
=== osd.1 ===
failed: 'ti
Hi,
I've removed the rbd pool and created it again. It picked up my default
settings but there are still some problems.
After running "sudo ceph -s", the output is as follow:
cluster 0b9b05db-98fe-49e6-b12b-1cce0645c015
health HEALTH_WARN
512 pgs stuck inacti
Hello,
On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 11:27:46 +0800 (CST) wikison wrote:
> Hi,
> I've removed the rbd pool and created it again. It picked up my
> default settings but there are still some problems. After running "sudo
> ceph -s", the output is as follow:
> cluster 0b9b05db-98fe-49e6-b12b-1cce
Does this patch fix files that have been corrupted in this manner?
If not, or I guess even if it does, is there a way to walk the
metadata and data pools and find objects that are affected?
Is that '_' xattr in hammer? If so, how can I access it? Doing a
listxattr on the inode just lists 'parent'
One possibility, it may be that the crush map is not creating. Look at your
/etc/ceph/ceph.conf file and see if you have something under the OSD
section (actually could be in global too) that looks like the following:
osd crush update on start = false
If that line is there and if you're not modif
Here, like this :
esta@monitorOne:~$ sudo ceph osd tree
ID WEIGHT TYPE NAMEUP/DOWN REWEIGHT PRIMARY-AFFINITY
-3 4.39996 root defualt
-2 1.0 host storageTwo
0 0.0 osd.0 up 1.0 1.0
1 1.0 osd.1 up 1.0
Hello,
On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 12:21:40 +0800 (CST) wikison wrote:
> Here, like this :
> esta@monitorOne:~$ sudo ceph osd tree
> ID WEIGHT TYPE NAMEUP/DOWN REWEIGHT PRIMARY-AFFINITY
> -3 4.39996 root defualt
That's your problem. It should be "default"
Your man
On Wed, 7 Oct 2015, Adam Tygart wrote:
> Does this patch fix files that have been corrupted in this manner?
Nope, it'll only prevent it from happening to new files (that haven't yet
been migrated between the cache and base tier).
> If not, or I guess even if it does, is there a way to walk the
>
Hi, Alexandre.
Very Very Good!
Thank you for your work! :)
С уважением, Фасихов Ирек Нургаязович
Моб.: +79229045757
2015-10-07 7:25 GMT+03:00 Alexandre DERUMIER :
> Hi,
>
> proxmox 4.0 has been released:
>
> http://forum.proxmox.com/threads/23780-Proxmox-VE-4-0-released!
>
>
> Some ceph improve
Hi Narendra,
we upgraded from (0.80.9)Firefly to Hammer.
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 2:49 AM, Narendra Trivedi (natrived) <
natri...@cisco.com> wrote:
> Hi Selcuk,
>
>
>
> Which version of ceph did you upgrade from to Hammer (0.94)?
>
>
>
> --Narendra
>
>
>
> *From:* ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-bou
25 matches
Mail list logo
