m at the same time like 2 out of 3).
I've read through the online manual, so now I'm looking for personal
perspectives that you may have.
Thanks,
Robert LeBlanc
___
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
This may be a better question for Federico. I've pulled the systemd stuff
from git and I have it working, but only if I have the volumes listed in
fstab. Is this the intended way that systemd will function for now or am I
missing a step? I'm pretty new to systemd.
Thanks,
Robert LeBlan
OK, I don't think the udev rules are on my machines. I built the cluster
manually and not with ceph-deploy. I must have missed adding the rules in
the manual or the Packages from Debian (Jessie) did not create them.
Robert LeBlanc
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 5:49 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On
ht, a
udev-trigger should mount and activate the OSD, and I won't have to
manually run the init.d script?
Thanks,
Robert LeBlanc
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2014, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> > OK, I don't think the udev rules are on my machi
is if the cluster (2+1) is HEALTHY,
does the write return after 2 of the OSDs (itself and one replica) complete
the write or only after all three have completed the write? We are planning
to try to do some testing on this as well if a clear answer can't be found.
Thank you,
Robert LeBlan
Thanks, your responses have been helpful.
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Robert LeBlanc
> wrote:
> > Greg, thanks for the reply, please see in-line.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 11:
hing there.
Robert LeBlanc
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Andrei Mikhailovsky
wrote:
> Hello guys,
>
> I am planning to perform regular rbd pool off-site backup with rbd export
> and export-diff. I've got a small ceph firefly cluster with an active
> writeback cache pool made o
ndrei
>
>
> ----- Original Message -
> From: "Robert LeBlanc"
> To: "Andrei Mikhailovsky"
> Cc: ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> Sent: Friday, 22 August, 2014 8:21:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [ceph-users] pool with cache pool and rbd export
>
>
> My understan
I believe the scrubbing happens at the pool level, when the backend pool is
scrubbed it is independent of the cache pool. It would be nice to get some
definite answers from someone who knows a lot more.
Robert LeBlanc
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Andrei Mikhailovsky
wrote:
> Does t
s our reasoning sound in this regard?
Thanks,
Robert LeBlanc
___
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 4:15 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Aug 2014, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> > I'm looking for a way to prioritize the heartbeat traffic higher than the
> > storage and replication traffic. I would like to keep the ceph.conf as
> > simple as
Interesting concept. What if this was extended to an external message bus
system like RabbitMQ, ZeroMQ, etc?
Robert LeBlanc
Sent from a mobile device please excuse any typos.
On Aug 27, 2014 7:34 PM, "Matt W. Benjamin" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wasn't thinking of an interface
How many PGs do you have in your pool? This should be about 100/OSD. If it
is too low, you could get an imbalance. I don't know the consequence of
changing it on such a full cluster. The default values are only good for
small test environments.
Robert LeBlanc
Sent from a mobile device p
According to http://ceph.com/docs/master/rados/operations/crush-map/, you
should be able to construct a clever use of 'step take' and 'step choose'
rules in your CRUSH map to force one copy to a particular bucket and allow
the other two copies to be chosen elsewhere. I was looking for a way to
have
ill be the
best option, but it can still use some performance tweaking with small
reads before it will be really viable for us.
Robert LeBlanc
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Dan Van Der Ster wrote:
> Dear Cephalopods,
>
> In a few weeks we will receive a batch of 200GB Intel DC S3700’s
;t want to make any big changes until we have a better idea of what the
future looks like. I think the Enterprise versions of Ceph (n-1 or n-2)
will be a bit too old from where we want to be, which I'm sure will work
wonderfully on Red Hat, but how will n.1, n.2 or n.3 run?
Robert LeBlanc
On T
yet. Do you know if you can use an md RAID1 as a cache
> dev? And is the graceful failover from wb to writethrough actually working
> without data loss?
>
> Also, write behind sure would help the filestore, since I'm pretty sure
> the same 4k blocks are being overwritten many t
gh.
Are the patches you talk about just backports from later kernels or
something different?
Robert LeBlanc
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Stefan Priebe wrote:
> Hi Dan, hi Robert,
>
> Am 04.09.2014 21:09, schrieb Dan van der Ster:
>
> Thanks again for all of your input.
We are still in the middle of testing things, but so far we have had more
improvement with SSD journals than the OSD cached with bcache (five OSDs
fronted by one SSD). We still have yet to test if adding a bcache layer in
addition to the SSD journals provides any additional improvements.
Robert
Sorry this is delayed, catching up. I beleive this was talked about in
the last Ceph summit. I think this was the blueprint.
https://wiki.ceph.com/Planning/Blueprints/Hammer/Towards_Ceph_Cold_Storage
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Martin Millnert wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> I'm currently trying to
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
We use ceph-disk without any issues on CentOS7. If you want to do a
manual deployment, verfiy you aren't missing any steps in
http://ceph.com/docs/master/install/manual-deployment/#long-form.
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Barclay Jameson
wrote:
> I have tried to install ceph using ceph-deploy
would like to try it to offer some feedback on your
question.
Thanks,
Robert LeBlanc
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> Hey,
>
> We are considering switching to civetweb (the embedded/standalone rgw web
> server) as the primary supported RGW frontend instead of
I think that your problem lies with systemd (even though you are using
SysV syntax, systemd is really doing the work). Systemd does not like
multiple arguments and I think this is why it is failing. There is
supposed to be some work done to get systemd working ok, but I think
it has the limitation
Cool, I'll see if we have some cycles to look at it.
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:49 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Feb 2015, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>> We tried to get radosgw working with Apache + mod_fastcgi, but due to
>> the changes in radosgw, Apache, mode_*cgi, etc a
s.
Thanks,
Robert LeBlanc
___
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
teresting part is that "ceph-disk activate" apparently does it
> correctly. Even after reboot, the services start as they should.
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Robert LeBlanc
> wrote:
>>
>> I think that your problem lies with systemd (even though you are u
Thanks, we were able to get it up and running very quickly. If it
performs well, I don't see any reason to use Apache+fast_cgi. I don't
have any problems just focusing on civetweb.
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:49 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Feb 2015, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>&
age-
> From: ceph-devel-ow...@vger.kernel.org
> [mailto:ceph-devel-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Robert LeBlanc
> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 12:27 PM
> To: Sage Weil
> Cc: Ceph-User; ceph-devel
> Subject: Re: [ceph-users] who is using radosgw with civetweb?
>
&
+1 for proxy. Keep the civetweb lean and mean and if people need
"extras" let the proxy handle this. Proxies are easy to set-up and a
simple example could be included in the documentation.
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>
>
>> Op 26 feb. 2015 om 18:22 heeft Sage Weil
Does deleting/reformatting the old osds improve the performance?
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 6:02 AM, Corin Langosch
wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I'm using ceph for a long time now, since bobtail. I always upgraded every
> few weeks/ months to the latest stable
> release. Of course I also removed some osds
Also sending to the devel list to see if they have some insight.
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> I tried finding an answer to this on Google, but couldn't find it.
>
> Since BTRFS can parallel the journal with the write, does it make
> sense to have t
I would be inclined to shut down both OSDs in a node, let the cluster
recover. Once it is recovered, shut down the next two, let it recover.
Repeat until all the OSDs are taken out of the cluster. Then I would
set nobackfill and norecover. Then remove the hosts/disks from the
CRUSH then unset nobac
If I remember right, someone has done this on a live cluster without
any issues. I seem to remember that it had a fallback mechanism if the
OSDs couldn't be reached on the cluster network to contact them on the
public network. You could test it pretty easily without much impact.
Take one OSD that h
t; Thanks for the tip of course !
> Andrija
>
> On 3 March 2015 at 18:34, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>>
>> I would be inclined to shut down both OSDs in a node, let the cluster
>> recover. Once it is recovered, shut down the next two, let it recover.
>> Repeat until all t
gt;> that are stoped (and cluster resynced after that) ?
>>
>> Thx again for the help
>>
>> On 4 March 2015 at 17:44, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>>>
>>> If I remember right, someone has done this on a live cluster without
>>> any issues. I seem to reme
I can't help much on the MDS front, but here is some answers and my
view on some of it.
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Datatone Lists wrote:
> I have been following ceph for a long time. I have yet to put it into
> service, and I keep coming back as btrfs improves and ceph reaches
> higher versi
David,
You will need to up the limit of open files in the linux system. Check
/etc/security/limits.conf. it is explained somewhere in the docs and the
autostart scripts 'fixes' the issue for most people. When I did a manual
deploy for the same reasons you are, I ran into this too.
Robe
Hi Robert,
>>
>> I already have this stuff set. CEph is 0.87.0 now...
>>
>> Thanks, will schedule this for weekend, 10G network and 36 OSDs - should
>> move data in less than 8h per my last experineced that was arround8h, but
>> some 1G OSDs were included..
I see that Jian Wen has done work on this for 0.94. I tried looking through
the code to see if I can figure out how to configure this new option, but
it all went over my head pretty quick.
Can I get a brief summary on how to set the priority of heartbeat packets
or where to look in the code to fig
Hidden HTML ... trying agin...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Robert LeBlanc
Date: Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 5:20 PM
Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Prioritize Heartbeat packets
To: "ceph-users@lists.ceph.com" ,
ceph-devel
I see that Jian Wen has done work on this for 0.94. I tri
e commit, this ought to do the trick:
>
> osd heartbeat use min delay socket = true
>
> On 07/03/15 01:20, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>>
>> I see that Jian Wen has done work on this for 0.94. I tried looking
>> through the code to see if I can figure out how to configure th
, 2015 at 3:36 AM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>> I've found commit 9b9a682fe035c985e416ee1c112fa58f9045a27c and I see
>> that when 'osd heartbeat use min delay socket = true' it will mark the
>> packet with DSCP CS6. Based on the setting of the socket in
>> msg/simple/Pi
ed? I
don't remember if you said you checked it.
Robert LeBlanc
Sent from a mobile device please excuse any typos.
On Mar 11, 2015 8:08 PM, "Jesus Chavez (jeschave)"
wrote:
> Thanks Steffen I have followed everything not sure what is going on, the
> mon keyring and client adm
205267%203146>*
> Mobile: *+51 1 5538883255 <+51%201%205538883255>*
>
> CCIE - 44433
>
> On Mar 12, 2015, at 7:54 AM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>
> If I remember right, the mon key has to be the same between all the mon
> hosts. I don't think I added an admin k
5538883255 <+51%201%205538883255>*
>
> CCIE - 44433
>
> On Mar 12, 2015, at 10:06 AM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>
> Add the new monitor to the Monitor map.
>
>
___
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
tion Information.
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 12, 2015, at 10:33 AM, Jesus Chavez (jeschave)
> wrote:
>
> Great :) so just 1 point more, step 4 in adding monitors (Add the
> new monitor to the Monitor map.) this command actually runs in the new
> monitor right?
>
> Thank you so much!
>
>
> * Jesus Chavez*
> SYSTEMS ENGINEER-C.SALES
>
> jesch...@cisco.com
> Phone: *+52 55 5267 3146 <+52%2055%205267%203146>*
> Mobile: *+51 1 5538883255 <+51%201%205538883255>*
>
> CCIE - 44433
>
> On Mar 12, 2015, at 10:06 AM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>
> Add the new monitor to the Monitor map.
>
>
>
___
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
The primary OSD for an object is responsible for the replication. In a
healthy cluster the workflow is as such:
1. Client looks up primary OSD in CRUSH map
2. Client sends object to be written to primary OSD
3. Primary OSD looks up replication OSD(s) in its CRUSH map
4. Primary OSD con
I'm not sure why you are having such a hard time. I added monitors (and
removed them) on CentOS 7 by following what I had. The thing that kept
tripping me up was firewalld. Once I either shut it off or created a
service for Ceph, it worked fine.
What is in in /var/log/ceph/ceph-mon.tauro.log when
trying to figure out :(. Thank you so much!
>
>
> * Jesus Chavez*
> SYSTEMS ENGINEER-C.SALES
>
> jesch...@cisco.com
> Phone: *+52 55 5267 3146 <+52%2055%205267%203146>*
> Mobile: *+51 1 5538883255 <+51%201%205538883255>*
>
> CCIE - 44433
>
> On Mar 12
Two monitors don't work very well and really don't but you anything. I
would either add another monitor or remove one. Paxos is most effective
with an odd number of monitors.
I don't know about the problem you are experiencing and how to help you. An
even number of monitors shoul
Having two monitors should not be causing the problem you are seeing like
you say. What is in /var/log/ceph/ceph.mon.*.log?
Robert LeBlanc
Sent from a mobile device please excuse any typos.
On Mar 12, 2015 7:39 PM, "Georgios Dimitrakakis"
wrote:
> Hi Robert!
>
> Thanks for
n run ceph-disk activate. Ceph-disk is just a script so you can open it
up and take a look.
So I guess it depends on which automatically you want to happen.
Robert LeBlanc
Sent from a mobile device please excuse any typos.
On Mar 12, 2015 9:54 PM, "Jesus Chavez (jeschave)"
wrote:
>
That is correct, you make a tradeoff between space, performance and
resiliency. By reducing replication from 3 to 2, you will get more space
and likely more performance (less overhead from third copy), but it comes
at the expense of being able to recover your data when there are multiple
failures.
We have a test cluster with IB. We have both networks over IPoIB on the
same IP subnet though (no cluster network configuration).
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 12:02 PM, German Anders
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Does anyone have Ceph implemented with Infiniband for Cluster and
> Public network?
>
> Th
>
> Any help will really be appreciated.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
>
>
> *German Anders*
>
> Storage System Engineer Leader
>
> *Despegar* | IT Team
>
> *office* +54 11 4894 3500 x3408
>
> *mobile* +54 911 3493 7262
> *mail* gand...@despegar.com
>
&
Udev already provides some of this for you. Look in /dev/disk/by-*.
You can reference drives by UUID, id or path (for
SAS/SCSI/FC/iSCSI/etc) which will provide some consistency across
reboots and hardware changes.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Colin Corr wrote:
> Greetings Cephers,
>
> I have
cally finds the volume with udev, mounts it
in the correct location and accesses the journal on the right disk.
It also may be a limitation on the version of ceph-deploy/ceph-disk
you are using.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Colin Corr wrote:
> On 03/19/2015 12:27 PM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
You can create CRUSH rulesets and then assign pools to different rulesets.
http://ceph.com/docs/master/rados/operations/crush-map/#placing-different-pools-on-different-osds
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:28 PM, Garg, Pankaj
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I have a Ceph cluster with both ARM and x86 based server
Removing the OSD from the CRUSH map and deleting the auth key is how you
force remove an OSD. The OSD can no longer participate in the cluster, even
if it does come back to life. All clients forget about the OSD when the new
CRUSH map is distributed.
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Jesus Chavez
We tested bcache and abandoned it for two reasons.
1. Didn't give us any better performance than journals on SSD.
2. We had lots of corruption of the OSDs and were rebuilding them
frequently.
Since removing them, the OSDs have been much more stable.
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 4:03 AM, Nick
The weight can be based on anything, size, speed, capability, some random
value, etc. The important thing is that it makes sense to you and that you
are consistent.
Ceph by default (ceph-disk and I believe ceph-deploy) take the approach of
using size. So if you use a different weighting scheme, yo
> This seems to be a fairly consistent problem for new users.
>
> The create-or-move is adjusting the crush weight, not the osd weight.
> Perhaps the init script should set the defaultweight to 0.01 if it's <= 0?
>
> It seems like there's a downside to this, but I don&
> jesch...@cisco.com
> Phone: *+52 55 5267 3146 <+52%2055%205267%203146>*
> Mobile: *+51 1 5538883255 <+51%201%205538883255>*
>
> CCIE - 44433
>
> On Mar 20, 2015, at 2:21 PM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>
> Removing the OSD from the CRUSH map and deleting the
Yes, at this point, I'd export the CRUSH, edit it and import it back in.
What version are you running?
Robert LeBlanc
Sent from a mobile device please excuse any typos.
On Mar 20, 2015 4:28 PM, "Jesus Chavez (jeschave)"
wrote:
> thats what you sayd?
>
> [root@capri
a on it we were able to format 40 OSDs
in under 30 minutes (we formatted a while host at a time because we knew
that was safe ) with a few little online scripts.
Short answer is don't be afraid to do it this way.
Robert LeBlanc
Sent from a mobile device please excuse any typos.
On Mar 2
I don't have a fresh cluster on hand to double check, but the default is to
select a different host for each replica. You can adjust that to fit your
needs, we are using cabinet as the selection criteria so that we can lose
an entire cabinet of storage and still function.
In order to store multipl
I was trying to decompile and edit the CRUSH map to adjust the CRUSH
rules. My first attempt created a map that would decompile, but I
could not recompile the CRUSH even if didn't modify it. When trying to
download the CRUSH fresh, now the decompile fails.
[root@nodezz ~]# ceph osd getmap -o map.c
27;
For some reason it doesn't like the rack definition. I can move things
around, like putting root before it and it always chokes on the first
rack definition no matter which one it is.
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> I was trying to decompile and edit the C
which we are on). Saving for posterity's sake. Thanks Sage!
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> Ok, so the decompile error is because I didn't download the CRUSH map
> (found that out using hexdump), but I still can't compile an
> unmodified CRUSH
You just need to change your rule from
step chooseleaf firstn 0 type osd
to
step chooseleaf firstn 0 type host
There will be data movement as it will want to move about half the
objects to the new host. There will be data generation as you move
from size 1 to size 2. As far as I know a deep scr
itrakakis Georgios
wrote:
> Robert thanks for the info!
>
> How can I find out and modify when is scheduled the next deep scrub,
> the number of backfill processes and their priority?
>
> Best regards,
>
> George
>
>
>
> Ο χρήστης Robert LeBlanc έγραψε
I'm trying to create a CRUSH ruleset and I'm using crushtool to test
the rules, but it doesn't seem to mapping things correctly. I have two
roots, on for spindles and another for SSD. I have two rules, one for
each root. The output of crushtool on rule 0 shows objects being
mapped to SSD OSDs when
although we haven't had show stopping issues with BTRFS, we are still
going to start on XFS. Our plan is to build a cluster as a target for our
backup system and we will put BTRFS on that to prove it in a production
setting.
Robert LeBlanc
Sent from a mobile device please excuse any typos.
On M
Is there an enumerated list of issues with snapshots on cache pools.
We currently have snapshots on a cache tier and haven't seen any
issues (development cluster). I just want to know what we should be
looking for.
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Stéphane DUGRAVOT
wrote:
>
>
> __
Mar 23, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> I'm trying to create a CRUSH ruleset and I'm using crushtool to test
> the rules, but it doesn't seem to mapping things correctly. I have two
> roots, on for spindles and another for SSD. I have two rules, one for
> ea
http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11224
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>> I'm not sure why crushtool --test --simulate doesn't match what the
>> cluster actually does, but the cluster seems
It doesn't look like your OSD is mounted. What do you have when you run
mount? How did you create your OSDs?
Robert LeBlanc
Sent from a mobile device please excuse any typos.
On Mar 25, 2015 1:31 AM, "oyym...@gmail.com" wrote:
> Hi，Jesus
> I encountered similar problem.
&g
I don't know much about ceph-deploy, but I know that ceph-disk has
problems "automatically" adding an SSD OSD when there are journals of
other disks already on it. I've had to partition the disk ahead of
time and pass in the partitions to make ceph-disk work.
Also, unless you are sure that the de
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>> I don't know much about ceph-deploy, but I know that ceph-disk has
>> problems "automatically" adding an SSD OSD when there are journals of
>> other disks already on it. I've had to partition
down, create a new snapshot on the new
pool, point the VM to that and then flatten the RBD.
Robert LeBlanc
Sent from a mobile device please excuse any typos.
On Mar 26, 2015 5:23 PM, "Steffen W Sørensen" wrote:
>
> On 26/03/2015, at 23.13, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>
> The procedure
86_64
libcephfs1-0.93-0.el7.centos.x86_64
ceph-0.93-0.el7.centos.x86_64
ceph-deploy-1.5.22-0.noarch
[ulhglive-root@mon1 systemd]# for i in $(rpm -qa | grep ceph); do rpm
-ql $i | grep -i --color=always systemd; done
[nothing returned]
Thanks,
Robert Le
ount of
time causing the OSDs to overrun a journal or something (I know that
Ceph journals pgmap changes and such). I'm concerned that this could
be very detrimental in a production environment. There doesn't seem to
be a way to recover from this.
Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Robert LeBlanc
___
Thanks, we'll give the gitbuilder packages a shot and report back.
Robert LeBlanc
Sent from a mobile device please excuse any typos.
On Mar 27, 2015 10:03 PM, "Sage Weil" wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Mar 2015, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> > I've built Ceph clusters a few times n
I've been working at this peering problem all day. I've done a lot of
testing at the network layer and I just don't believe that we have a
problem that would prevent OSDs from peering. When looking though osd_debug
20/20 logs, it just doesn't look like the OSDs are trying to peer. I don't
know if i
Sorry HTML snuck in somewhere.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Robert LeBlanc
Date: Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 8:15 PM
Subject: Force an OSD to try to peer
To: Ceph-User , ceph-devel
I've been working at this peering problem all day. I've done a lot of
testing at the network
Turns out jumbo frames was not set on all the switch ports. Once that
was resolved the cluster quickly became healthy.
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 8:15 PM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> I've been working at this peering problem all day. I've done a lot of
> testing at the network layer
I was desperate for anything after exhausting every other possibility
I could think of. Maybe I should put a checklist in the Ceph docs of
things to look for.
Thanks,
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Mar 2015, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>> Turns out jumbo f
ng ?
> In our setup so far, we haven't enabled jumbo frames other than performance
> reason (if at all).
>
> Thanks & Regards
> Somnath
>
> -Original Message-
> From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com] On Behalf Of
> Robert LeBlanc
> Se
re others doing to locate performance issues in their Ceph clusters?
Thanks,
Robert LeBlanc
___
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
I really like this proposal.
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 2:33 AM, Joao Eduardo Luis wrote:
> On 04/13/2015 02:25 AM, Christian Balzer wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Apr 2015 14:37:56 -0700 Gregory Farnum wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Francois Lafont
>>> wrote:
Somnath Roy wrote:
>>>
We are getting ready to put the Quantas into production. We looked at
the Supermico Atoms (we have 6 of them), the rails were crap (they
exploded the first time you pull the server out, and they stick out of
the back of the cabinet about 8 inches, these boxes are already very
deep), we also ran out
For us, using two 40Gb ports with VLANs is redundancy enough. We are
doing LACP over two different switches.
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 3:03 AM, Götz Reinicke - IT Koordinator
wrote:
> Dear ceph users,
>
> we are planing a ceph storage cluster from scratch. Might be up to 1 PB
> within the next 3 ye
Message-
>> From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com] On Behalf Of
>> Robert LeBlanc
>> Sent: 13 April 2015 17:27
>> To: Jerker Nyberg
>> Cc: ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
>> Subject: Re: [ceph-users] low power single disk nodes
>>
>> We ar
I'm looking for documentation about what exactly each of these do and
I can't find it. Can someone point me in the right direction?
The names seem too ambiguous to come to any conclusion about what
exactly they do.
Thanks,
Robert
___
ceph-users mailing
active+undersized+degraded+remapped+backfilling
1 active+recovery_wait+undersized+degraded+remapped
client io 1864 kB/s rd, 8853 kB/s wr, 65 op/s
Any help understanding these flags would be very helpful.
Thanks,
Robert
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Robert LeBlanc
wrote:
>
CRUSH map. That should work, I'll test it on my cluster.
I'd still like to know the difference between norecover and nobackfill if
anyone knows.
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 7:40 PM, Francois Lafont wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>
> > What I'm trying to achiev
OK, I remember now, if I don't remove the OSD from the CRUSH, ceph-disk
will get a new OSD ID and the old one will hang around as a zombie. This
will change the host/rack/etc weights causing cluster wide rebalance.
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 9:31 AM, Robert LeBlanc
wrote:
> HmmmI
http://eu.ceph.com/ has rsync and Hammer.
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:17 AM, Paul Mansfield <
paul.mansfi...@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:
>
> Sorry for starting a new thread, I've only just subscribed to the list
> and the archive on the mail listserv is far from complete at the moment.
>
> on 8th M
Delete and re-add all six OSDs.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 3:36 AM, Andrija Panic
wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I have 1 SSD that hosted 6 OSD's Journals, that is dead, so 6 OSD down,
> ceph rebalanced etc.
>
> Now I have new SSD inside, and I will partition it etc - but would like to
> know, how to procee
1 - 100 of 492 matches
Mail list logo
