Hi Goncalo,
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 6:51 AM, Goncalo Borges
wrote:
> Hi Sage...
>
> I've seen that the rh6 derivatives have been ruled out.
>
> This is a problem in our case since the OS choice in our systems is,
> somehow, imposed by CERN. The experiments software is certified for SL6 and
> the
Hi Tyler,
Thanks for your reply. We have disabled rbd_cache but still issue is
persist. Please find our configuration file.
# cat /etc/ceph/ceph.conf
[global]
fsid = 944fa0af-b7be-45a9-93ff-b9907cfaee3f
mon_initial_members = integ-hm5, integ-hm6, integ-hm7
mon_host = 192.168.112.
Hi,
I've been thinking about this for a while now - does Ceph really need a
journal? Filesystems are already pretty good at committing data to disk when
asked (and much faster too), we have external journals in XFS and Ext4...
In a scenario where client does an ordinary write, there's no need to
Yan, Zheng пишет:
2) I have 3 active mds now. I try, it works, keep it. Restart still
problematic.
multiple active MDS is not ready for production.
OK, so if I run 3 active now (looks good) - better to turn back to 1?
3) Yes, more caps on master VM (4.2.3 kernel mount, there are
web+mail+
Hello,
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 09:25:41 +1000 Lindsay Mathieson wrote:
> I'm adding a node (4 * WD RED 3TB) to our small cluster to bring it up to
> replica 3.
Can we assume from this node that the your current setup is something like
2 nodes with 4 drives each?
> Given how much headache it has b
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Dan van der Ster wrote:
> Hi Goncalo,
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 6:51 AM, Goncalo Borges
> wrote:
> > Hi Sage...
> >
> > I've seen that the rh6 derivatives have been ruled out.
> >
> > This is a problem in our case since the OS choice in our systems is,
> > somehow, imposed
On 10/13/2015 11:01 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> http://download.ceph.com/debian-testing
unfortunately this site is not reachable at the moment.
$ wget http://download.ceph.com/debian-testing/dists/wheezy/InRelease -O -
--2015-10-14 16:06:55--
http://download.ceph.com/debian-testing/dists/wheezy/In
Hello,
We recently had 2 nodes go down in our ceph cluster, one was repaired and the
other had all 12 osds destroyed when it went down. We brought everything back
online, there were several PGs that were showing as down+peering as well as
down. After marking the failed OSDs as lost and removing
Jan,
Journal helps FileStore to maintain the transactional integrity in the event of
a crash. That's the main reason.
Thanks & Regards
Somnath
-Original Message-
From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com] On Behalf Of Jan
Schermer
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 2:28
On 14-10-15 16:30, Björn Lässig wrote:
> On 10/13/2015 11:01 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
>> http://download.ceph.com/debian-testing
>
> unfortunately this site is not reachable at the moment.
>
>
> $ wget http://download.ceph.com/debian-testing/dists/wheezy/InRelease -O -
> --2015-10-14 16:06:55--
Hello,
debugging slow requests behaviour of our Rados Gateway, I run into
this linger_ops field and I cannot understand the meaning.
I would expect in the "ops" field to find slow requests stucked there.
Actually most of the time I have "ops": [], and looks like ops gets
empty very quickly.
Howe
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Saverio Proto wrote:
> Hello,
>
> debugging slow requests behaviour of our Rados Gateway, I run into
> this linger_ops field and I cannot understand the meaning.
>
> I would expect in the "ops" field to find slow requests stucked there.
> Actually most of the time
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
It seems in our situation the cluster is just busy, usually with
really small RBD I/O. We have gotten things to where it doesn't happen
as much in a steady state, but when we have an OSD fail (mostly from
an XFS log bug we hit at least once a week),
Hi all,
I would like to know if with this new release of Infernalis is there
somewhere a procedure in order to implement xio messager with ib and ceph.
Also if it's possible to change an existing ceph cluster to this kind of
new setup (the existing cluster does not had any production data yet).
T
Hi,
Not to complain or flame about it, but I see a lot of messages which are
being send to both users and ceph-devel.
Imho that beats the purpose of having a users and a devel list, isn't it?
The problem is that messages go to both lists and users hit reply-all
again and so it continues.
For ex
Hi Mark,
The Async result in 128K drops quickly after some point, is that because
of the testing methodology?
Other conclusion looks to me like simple messenger + Jemalloc is the best
practice till now as it has the same performance as async but using much less
memory?
-Xiaoxi
But that's exactly what filesystems and their own journals do already :-)
Jan
> On 14 Oct 2015, at 17:02, Somnath Roy wrote:
>
> Jan,
> Journal helps FileStore to maintain the transactional integrity in the event
> of a crash. That's the main reason.
>
> Thanks & Regards
> Somnath
>
> -O
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Jan Schermer wrote:
> But that's exactly what filesystems and their own journals do already :-)
They do it for filesystem "transactions", not ceph transactions. It's
true that there is quite a bit of double journaling going on - newstore
should help with that qui
Can you elaborate on that? I don't think there needs to be a difference. Ceph
is hosting mostly filesystems, so it's all just a bunch of filesystem
transactions anyway...
Jan
> On 14 Oct 2015, at 18:14, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Jan Schermer wrote:
>> But that'
> Can you elaborate on that? I don't think there needs to be a difference. Ceph
> is hosting mostly filesystems, so it's all just a bunch of filesystem
> transactions anyway...
>
There is some additional background information here [1]. The XFS journal
protects "atomic" (for lack of a better wo
On 10/14/2015 05:11 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>
>
> On 14-10-15 16:30, Björn Lässig wrote:
>> On 10/13/2015 11:01 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
>>> http://download.ceph.com/debian-testing
>>
>> unfortunately this site is not reachable at the moment.
>>
> wido@wido-desktop:~$ wget -6
> http://downloa
Hi Xiaoxi,
I would ignore the tails on those tests. I suspect it's just some fio
processes finishing earlier than others and the associated aggregate
performance dropping off. These reads tests are so fast that my
original guess at reasonable volume sizes for 300 second tests appear to
be o
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> It seems in our situation the cluster is just busy, usually with
> really small RBD I/O. We have gotten things to where it doesn't happen
> as much in a steady state, but when we have an OSD fail (mo
Let me be more specific about what I need in order to move forward with
this kind of install:
setup:
3 mon servers
8 osd servers (4 with SAS disks and SSD journal - relation 1:3) and (4 with
SSD disks osd & journal on the same disk)
running ceph version 0.94.3
I've already install and test *fi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
I'm sure I have a log of a 1,000 second block somewhere, I'll have to
look around for it.
I'll try turning that knob and see what happens. I'll come back with
the results.
Thanks,
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45
A couple of questions related to this, especially since we have a hammer
bug that's biting us so we're anxious to upgrade to Infernalis.
1) RE: ibrbd and librados ABI compatibility is broken. Be careful installing
this RC on client machines (e.g., those running qemu). It will be fixed in
the fina
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Kyle Hutson wrote:
> A couple of questions related to this, especially since we have a hammer
> bug that's biting us so we're anxious to upgrade to Infernalis.
Which bug? We want to fix hammer, too!
> 1) RE: ibrbd and librados ABI compatibility is broken. Be careful install
> Which bug? We want to fix hammer, too!
This one:
https://www.mail-archive.com/ceph-users@lists.ceph.com/msg23915.html
(Adam sits about 5' from me.)
___
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ce
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Kyle Hutson wrote:
> > Which bug? We want to fix hammer, too!
>
> This
> one: https://www.mail-archive.com/ceph-users@lists.ceph.com/msg23915.html
>
> (Adam sits about 5' from me.)
Oh... that fix is already in the hammer branch and will be in 0.94.4.
Since you have to go
Nice! Thanks!
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, Kyle Hutson wrote:
> > > Which bug? We want to fix hammer, too!
> >
> > This
> > one:
> https://www.mail-archive.com/ceph-users@lists.ceph.com/msg23915.html
> >
> > (Adam sits about 5' from me.)
>
> Oh... tha
FileSystem like XFS guarantees a single file write but in Ceph transaction we
are touching file/xattrs/leveldb (omap), so no way filesystem can guarantee
that transaction. That's why FileStore has implemented a write_ahead journal.
Basically, it is writing the entire transaction object there and
Not thoroughly tested, but I've got a quick and dirty script to fix
these up. Worst case scenario, it does nothing. In my limited testing,
the contents of the files comes back without a remount of cephfs.
https://github.com/BeocatKSU/admin/blob/master/ec_cephfs_fixer.py
--
Adam
On Thu, Oct 8, 20
On 10/14/2015 06:50 PM, Björn Lässig wrote:
> On 10/14/2015 05:11 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 14-10-15 16:30, Björn Lässig wrote:
>>> On 10/13/2015 11:01 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
http://download.ceph.com/debian-testing
>>>
>>> unfortunately this site is not reachable at the moment.
On 10/14/2015 06:50 PM, Björn Lässig wrote:
> On 10/14/2015 05:11 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 14-10-15 16:30, Björn Lässig wrote:
>>> On 10/13/2015 11:01 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
http://download.ceph.com/debian-testing
>>>
>>> unfortunately this site is not reachable at the moment.
Hi,
Currently the public keys for signing the packages can be found on
git.ceph.com:
https://git.ceph.com/git/?p=ceph.git;a=blob_plain;f=keys/release.asc
git.ceph.com doesn't have IPv6, but it also isn't mirrored to any system.
It would be handy if http://download.ceph.com/release.asc would exis
Hi,
After I set up more than 1 mds servers, it sometimes gets stuck or
slow from client end. I tried to stop one mds and then the client end
will hang there.
I accidentally set up bal frag=true. Not sure if it matters. Later I
disabled this feature.
Is there any reason for the abo
Hi All,
I'm just trying to get my head around the hitset behaviour in cache tiering.
I'm running latest master.
If I have only a single hitset with say a hitset_period of 60s, when does a
new one get created? Doing a simple PUT test, I get the feeling that the
current hitset stays for eve
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 10:30 PM, Erming Pei wrote:
> Hi,
>
>After I set up more than 1 mds servers, it sometimes gets stuck or slow
> from client end. I tried to stop one mds and then the client end will hang
> there.
>
>I accidentally set up bal frag=true. Not sure if it matters. Later I
Hi Sage, Dan...
In our case, we have strongly invested in the testing of CephFS. It
seems as a good solution to some of the issues we currently experience
regarding the use cases from our researchers.
While I do not see a problem in deploying Ceph cluster in SL7, I suspect
that we will need
Hi and thanks at all for this good news, ;)
On 13/10/2015 23:01, Sage Weil wrote:
>#. Fix the data ownership during the upgrade. This is the preferred
> option,
> but is more work. The process for each host would be to:
>
> #. Upgrade the ceph package. This creates the ceph u
Sorry, another remark.
On 13/10/2015 23:01, Sage Weil wrote:
> The v9.1.0 packages are pushed to the development release repositories::
>
> http://download.ceph.com/rpm-testing
> http://download.ceph.com/debian-testing
I don't see the 9.1.0 available for Ubuntu Trusty :
http://downloa
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015, Goncalo Borges wrote:
> Hi Sage, Dan...
>
> In our case, we have strongly invested in the testing of CephFS. It seems as a
> good solution to some of the issues we currently experience regarding the use
> cases from our researchers.
>
> While I do not see a problem in deployi
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015, Francois Lafont wrote:
> Hi and thanks at all for this good news, ;)
>
> On 13/10/2015 23:01, Sage Weil wrote:
>
> >#. Fix the data ownership during the upgrade. This is the preferred
> > option,
> > but is more work. The process for each host would be to:
> >
>
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015, Francois Lafont wrote:
> Sorry, another remark.
>
> On 13/10/2015 23:01, Sage Weil wrote:
>
> > The v9.1.0 packages are pushed to the development release repositories::
> >
> > http://download.ceph.com/rpm-testing
> > http://download.ceph.com/debian-testing
>
> I don't
Hi,
It should be sure SSD Journal will improve the performance of IOPS. But
unfortunately it's not in my test.
I have two pools with the same number of osds:
pool1, ssdj_sas:
9 osd servers, 8 OSDs(SAS) on every server
Journal on SSD, one SSD disk for 4 SAS disks.
pool 2, sas:
9 osd servers, 8
Hello,
Firstly, this is clearly a ceph-users question, don't cross post to
ceph-devel.
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 09:29:03 +0800 hzwuli...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It should be sure SSD Journal will improve the performance of IOPS. But
> unfortunately it's not in my test.
>
> I have two pools wit
Hi,
On 14/10/2015 06:45, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>> Ok, however during my tests I had been careful to replace the correct
>> file by a bad file with *exactly* the same size (the content of the
>> file was just a little string and I have changed it by a string with
>> exactly the same size). I had b
Hi Tyler,
Can please send me the next setup action to be taken on this issue.
Regards
Prabu
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 13:43:29 +0530 gjprabu
wrote
Hi Tyler,
Thanks for your reply. We have disabled rbd_cache but still issue is
persist. Ple
On 10/14/2015 09:19 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
unfortunately this site is not reachable at the moment.
http://eu.ceph.com/debian-testing/dists/wheezy/InRelease
this one works fine for all sites. I'll tell my puppetmaster to deploy
the source and we will debug this issue later in detail.
49 matches
Mail list logo