I think I got over 10% improvement when I changed from cooked journal
file on btrfs based system SSD to a raw partition on the system SSD.
The cluster I've been testing with is all consumer grade stuff running
on top of AMD piledriver and kaveri based mobo's with the on-board
SATA. My SSDs ar
Just got into a discussion today where I may have a chance to do work
with a db guy who wants hadoop and I want to steer him to it on cephfs.
While I'd really like to run gentoo with either infernalis or jewel
(when it becomes stable in portage), odds are more likely that I will be
required to
Actually this guy is already a fan of Hadoop. I was just wondering
whether anyone has been playing around with it on top of cephfs lately.
It seems like the last round of papers were from around cuttlefish.
On 04/28/2016 06:21 AM, Oliver Dzombic wrote:
Hi,
bad idea :-)
Its of course nice a
Actually you didn't need to do a udev rule for raw journals. Disk
devices in gentoo have their group ownership set to 'disk'. I only
needed to drop ceph into that in /etc/group when going from hammer to
infernalis.
Did you poke around any of the ceph howto's on the gentoo wiki? It's
been a
ma upgrade. I think that one got stablized
before it was quite ready for prime time. Even then I'll probably take
a good long time to backup some stuff before I try out the shiny new
fsck utility.
On 05/01/2016 07:13 PM, Stuart Longland wrote:
Hi Bill,
On 02/05/16 04:37, Bill Sharer w
rot.
The only errors I've run into are from hard shutdowns and possible ecc
errors due to working with consumer hardware and memory. I've been on
top of btrfs using gentoo since Firefly.
Bill Sharer
On 06/14/2016 09:27 PM, Christian Balzer wrote:
Hello,
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 14:2
:_ms_dispatch(Message*)+0x581) [0x556dffe22b91]
13: (Monitor::ms_dispatch(Message*)+0x23) [0x556dffe41393]
14: (DispatchQueue::entry()+0x7ba) [0x556e002e722a]
15: (DispatchQueue::DispatchThread::entry()+0xd) [0x556e001d62cd]
16: (()+0x74a4) [0x7f8290f904
ptopp -debug -lttng -tcmalloc {-test} -zfs"
PYTHON_TARGETS="python2_7 python3_4 -python3_5" 11,271 KiB
Bill Sharer
On 07/05/2016 01:45 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
Thanks for the report; created a ticket and somebody will get on it
shortly. http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/16592
-Greg
I noticed on that USE list that the 10.2.2 ebuild introduced a new
cephfs emerge flag, so I enabled that and emerged everywhere again. The
active mon is still crashing on the assertion though.
Bill Sharer
On 07/05/2016 08:14 PM, Bill Sharer wrote:
Relevant USE flags FWIW
# emerge -pv
Manual downgrade to 10.2.0 put me back in business. I'm going to mask
10.2.2 and then try to let 10.2.1 emerge.
Bill Sharer
On 07/06/2016 02:16 PM, Bill Sharer wrote:
I noticed on that USE list that the 10.2.2 ebuild introduced a new
cephfs emerge flag, so I enabled that and em
have a problem though if I do a complete cold start of
the cluster.
Bill Sharer
On 07/06/2016 04:19 PM, Bill Sharer wrote:
Manual downgrade to 10.2.0 put me back in business. I'm going to mask
10.2.2 and then try to let 10.2.1 emerge.
Bill Sharer
On 07/06/2016 02:16 PM, Bill Sharer
ok at the SMART info on the drive or drives in the RAID set to
see what the error counts suggest about this. You may also be looking
at a drive that's about to fail.
Bill Sharer
On 07/28/2016 08:46 AM, c wrote:
Hello Ceph alikes :)
i have a strange issue with one PG (0.223) combined
hint may
be buried in the raw read error rate, seek error rate or other error
counts like ecc or crc errors. The long test you are running may or may
not show any new information.
Bill Sharer
On 07/28/2016 11:46 AM, c wrote:
Am 2016-07-28 15:26, schrieb Bill Sharer:
I suspect the data for
keep in mind that you are down 11 osds while that system drive gets
rebuilt though. It's safer to do 10 osds and then have a mirror set for
the system disk.
Bill Sharer
On 08/12/2016 03:33 PM, Ronny Aasen wrote:
On 12.08.2016 13:41, Félix Barbeira wrote:
Hi,
I'm planning to m
I've been in the process of updating my gentoo based cluster both with
new hardware and a somewhat postponed update. This includes some major
stuff including the switch from gcc 4.x to 5.4.0 on existing hardware
and using gcc 6.4.0 to make better use of AMD Ryzen on the new
hardware. The existing
07 AM, John Spray wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 1:42 AM, Bill Sharer wrote:
>> I've been in the process of updating my gentoo based cluster both with
>> new hardware and a somewhat postponed update. This includes some major
>> stuff including the switch from gcc 4.x to 5.
bluestore. So far so good... I just took a peek and
saw the files being owned by Mr root though. Is there going to be an
ownership reset at some point or will I have to resolve that by hand?
On 10/12/2017 06:09 AM, John Spray wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Bill Sharer wrote:
&
al process would exit without writing anything to its
/var/log/ceph/ceph-osd.n.log. I would have thought there might have
been some sort of permission error logged, but nope :-)
Bill Sharer
___
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.cep
hardware newer than about five years old, you might want to
look at enabling the NIC clocks using LinuxPTP to keep clock jitter down
inside your LAN. I wrote this article on the Gentoo wiki on enabling
PTP in chrony.
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Chrony_with_hardware_timestamping
Bill Sharer
igure
out what sort of insanity is going on in your IT department. If you
aren't the domain admin or aren't good friends with one who also knows
Unix/Linux you may never get anywhere.
Bill Sharer
On 8/28/19 2:32 PM, Salsa wrote:
This is the result:
# testparm -s
Load smb config
20 matches
Mail list logo
