-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Accelio and Ceph are still in heavy development and not ready for production.
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 10:31 AM, German Anders wrote:
Hi cephers
ts in a cluster, you are doing that
for performance, in which case I would say it is not enough.
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 5:19 AM, gjprabu wrote:
Hi Robert,
We are going to use ceph with
for my comfort. If you want
to go with large boxes, I would be sure to do a lot of research and
ask people here on the list about what needs to be done to get optimum
performance.
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Tue, Sep 1
/s+iBVV0xbwqOY+IO9UNUfLAKNy7E1xtpXdTpQBuokmu/4D
WXg3C4u+DsZNvcziO4s/edQ1koOQm1Fcj5VnbouSqmsHpB5nHeJbGmiKNTBA
9pE/hTph56YRqOE3bq3X/ohjtziL7/e/MVF3VUisDJieaLxV9weLxKIf0W9t
L7NMhX7iUIMps5ulA9qzd8qJK6yBa65BVXtk5M0A5oTA/VvxHQT6e5nSZS+Z
WLjavMnmSSJT1BQZ5GkVbVqo4UVjndcXEvkBm3+McaGKliO2xvxP+U3nCKpZ
js+h
=4WAa
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
---
Could this be a lock issue? From what I understand, librbd does not create
an rbd device, it is all done in userspace. I would make sure that you have
unmapped the image from all machines and try it again. I haven't done a lot
with librbd myself, but my co-workers have it working just fine with KVM
Systemd is supposed to still use the init.d scripts if they are present,
however I've run into problems with it on my CentOS 7 boxes. The biggest
issue is that systemd does not like having multiple arguments to the
scripts. There is a systemd directory in the Master branch that does work,
but you h
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Sep 2014, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>
>
> A simpler workaround is to simply run
>
> ceph-disk activate-all
>
> from rc.local.
>
> sage
>
>
Thanks, I'll look into that!
_
ri, Sep 26, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Robert LeBlanc
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 26 Sep 2014, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>>
>>
>> A simpler workaround is to simply run
>>
>> ceph-disk activate-all
>>
On our dev cluster, I've got a PG that won't create. We had a host fail
with 10 OSDs that needed to be rebuilt. A number of other OSDs were down
for a few days (did I mention this was a dev cluster?). The other OSDs
eventually came up once the OSD maps caught up on them. I rebuilt the OSDs
on all t
I rebuilt the primary OSD (29) in the hopes it would unblock whatever it
was, but no luck. I'll check the admin socket and see if there is anything
I can find there.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 10:36 AM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 30, 2014, Robert LeBlanc
> wrote:
We have also got unrecoverable XFS errors with bcache. Our expereince is
that SSD journals provide about the same performance benefit (some times
better) than bcache. SSD journals are easier to set up.
On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 5:04 AM, Vladislav Gorbunov
wrote:
> >Has anyone tried using bcache of
I have a question regarding submitting blueprints. Should only people who
intend to do the work of adding/changing features of Ceph submit
blueprints? I'm not primarily a programmer (but can do programming if
needed), but have a feature request for Ceph.
Thanks,
Robert Le
I'm still pretty new at Ceph so take this with a grain of salt.
1. In our experience, we have tried SSD journals and bcache, we have had
more stability and performance by just using SSD journals. We have created
an SSD pool with the rest of the space and it did not perform much better
I've had issues magically fix themselves over night after waiting/trying
things for hours.
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Harald Rößler
wrote:
> After more than 10 hours the same situation, I don’t think it will fix
> self over time. How I can find out what is the problem.
>
>
> Am 21.10.2014
ideally, we would like to have each of the daemons broken out into
separate files on the syslog host, including a separate audit log (so it
can't be tampered with). Anyone already doing this with rsyslog and would
be willing to share their rsyslog conf?
Thanks,
Robert LeBlanc
[1]
ht
The maintainers of the kernel-ml[1] package have graciously accepted the
request to include the RBD module in the mainline kernel build[2]. This
should help people test out new kernels with RBD easier if you have better
things to than build new kernels.
Thanks kernel-ml maintainers!
Robert
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.130/0.157/0.190/0.016 ms
IPoIB Mellanox ConnectX-3 MT27500 FDR adapter and Mellanox IS5022 QDR
switch MTU set to 65520. CentOS 7.0.1406 running 3.17.2-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
on Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU C2750 with 32 GB of RAM.
On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Udo Lembke wrote:
.
Robert LeBlanc
Sent from a mobile device please excuse any typos.
On Nov 7, 2014 4:25 AM, "Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG" <
s.pri...@profihost.ag> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this is with intel 10GBE bondet (2x10Gbit/s) network.
> rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.053/0.107/0.184/0.034 ms
>
I believe that the kernel-ml and kernel-lt packages from ELrepo have the
RBD module already built (except for CentOS7 which will get it on the next
kernel release). If you want to stay with the stock kernel, I don't have a
good answer. I've had to rebuild the kernel to get RBD.
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014
oarch 1-0.el7
installed
libcephfs1.x86_641:0.87-0.el7.centos
@Ceph
python-ceph.x86_64 1:0.87-0.el7.centos
@Ceph
Thanks,
Robert Le
Is this with a 8192 byte payload? Theoretical transfer time of 1 Gbps (you
are only sending one packet so LACP won't help) one direction is 0.061 ms,
double that and you are at 0.122 ms of bits in flight, then there is
context switching, switch latency (store and forward assumed for 1 Gbps),
etc wh
Will there be RPMs built for this release?
Thanks,
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> This is the first development release after Giant. The two main
> features merged this round are the new AsyncMessenger (an alternative
> implementation of the network layer) from Haomai Wang
Ceph in Docker is very intriguing to me, but I understood that there were
still a number of stability and implementation issues. What is your
experience? Please post a link to your blog when you are done, I'd be
interested in reading it.
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 4:15 PM, Christopher Armstrong
wrot
I was going to submit this as a bug, but thought I would put it here for
discussion first. I have a feeling that it could be behavior by design.
ceph version 0.87 (c51c8f9d80fa4e0168aa52685b8de40e42758578)
I'm using a cache pool and was playing around with the size and min_size on
the pool to see
On Nov 18, 2014 4:48 PM, "Gregory Farnum" wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Robert LeBlanc
wrote:
> > I was going to submit this as a bug, but thought I would put it here for
> > discussion first. I have a feeling that it could be behavior by desig
tivity for a longer period of time impacting
performance if you have not adjusted max_backfill and other related options.
Robert LeBlanc
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Lindsay Mathieson <
lindsay.mathie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have 2 OSD's on two nodes top of zfs that I
I prefer the third option (enumeration). I don't see a point where we would
enable experimental features on our production clusters, but it would be
nice to have the same bits and procedures between our dev/beta and
production clusters.
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 10:36 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
> A while
I'm a big fan of /etc/*.d/ configs. Basically if the package maintained
/etc/ceph.conf includes all files in /etc/ceph.d/ then I can break up the
files however I'd like (mon, ods, mds, client, one per daemon, etc). Then
when upgrading, I don't have to worry about the new packages trying to
overwrit
I guess you would have to specify the cluster name in /etc/ceph/ceph.conf?
That would be my only concern.
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> > I'm a big fan of /etc/*.d/ configs. Basically if the package maintained
>
If cluster is specified in /etc/default/ceph than I don't have any other
reservations to your proposal.
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> > I guess you would have to specify the cluster name in
> /etc/ceph/ceph.con
f.
I thought there would be more input on this topic. I know that some people
are vehemently opposed to *.d/, but I have really come to like it and
cringe when something doesn't support it.
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>
There are really only two ways to do snapshots that I know of and they have
trade-offs:
COW into the snapshot (like VMware, Ceph, etc):
When a write is committed, the changes are committed to a diff file and the
base file is left untouched. This only has a single write penalty, if you
want to dis
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 5:37 PM, Lindsay Mathieson <
lindsay.mathie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 17 December 2014 at 04:50, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> > There are really only two ways to do snapshots that I know of and they
> have
> > trade-offs:
> >
> > COW in
Udo,
I was wondering yesterday if aligning the LVM VG to 4MB would provide any
performance benefit. My hunch is that it would, much like erasure blocks on
SSDs (probably not so much now). I haven't had a chance to test it though.
If you do, I'd like to know your results.
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 1
snapshot.
Am I going about this the wrong way? I can see having to restore a number
of VM because of corrupted clone, but I'd hate to lose all the clones
because of corruption in the snapshot. I would be happy if the restored
snapshot would be flattened if it was a clone of another image previou
I'm interested to know if there is a reference to this reference
architecture. It would help alleviate some of the fears we have about
scaling this thing to a massive scale (10,000's OSDs).
Thanks,
Robert LeBlanc
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Craig Lewis
wrote:
>
>
>
>
.slideshare.net/Inktank_Ceph/scaling-ceph-at-cern
>
>
> At large scale, the biggest problem will likely be network I/O on the
> inter-switch links.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Robert LeBlanc
> wrote:
>>
>> I'm interested to know if there is a refe
Do you know if this value is not set if it uses 4MB or 4096 bytes?
Thanks,
Robert LeBlanc
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 6:51 PM, Tyler Wilson wrote:
>
> Okay, this is rather unrelated to Ceph but I might as well mention how
> this is fixed. When using the Juno-Release OpenStack
osd 7 back in, it would clear up.
I'm just not seeing a secondary osd for that PG.
Disclaimer: I could be totally wrong.
Robert LeBlanc
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 11:41 PM, Mallikarjun Biradar <
mallikarjuna.bira...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I had 12 OSD's
could get congestion especially on a 1 Gb network.
Robert LeBlanc
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Nico Schottelius <
nico-ceph-us...@schottelius.org> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> another issue we have experienced with qemu VMs
> (qemu 2.0.0) with ceph-0.80 on Ubuntu 14.04
>
o the correct
part-uuid partition.
Ceph-disk list should map the journal and the data disks after that.
Robert LeBlanc
On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 7:11 AM, Florent MONTHEL
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to separate OSD and journal on 2 différent disks so I have :
>
> 1 disk /dev/sde (1
ponents in
the same OS because they can interfere with each other pretty bad. Putting
them in VMs gets around some of the possible deadlocks but then there is
usually not enough disk IO.
That is my $0.02.
Robert LeBlanc
Sent from a mobile device please excuse any typos.
On Dec 23, 2014 6:12 AM,
It took me a while to figure out the callout script since it wasn't
documented anywhere easy. This is what I wrote down, it could be helpful to
you or others:
1.
Add the hook script to the ceph.conf file of each OSD
osd crush location hook = /path/to/script
1.
Install the script a
sequential access on your storage
systems anyways.
On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 6:33 AM, Lindsay Mathieson <
lindsay.mathie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:50:37 AM Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> > COW into the snapshot (like VMware, Ceph, etc):
> > When a write is committed,
Now that the holidays are over, I'm going to bump this message to see if
there are any good ideas on this.
Thanks,
Robert LeBlanc
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Robert LeBlanc
wrote:
> Before we base thousands of VM image clones off of one or more snapshots,
> I want to test w
I think because ceph-disk or ceph-deploy doesn't support --osd-uuid.
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Andrey Korolyov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
> > On 12/31/2014 05:54 PM, Andrey Korolyov wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Wido den Hollander
Ceph currently isn't very smart on ordering the balancing operations. It
can fill a disk before moving some things off of it. So if you are close to
the toofull line, it can push that OSD over. I think there is a blueprint
to help with this being worked on for Hammer.
You have a couple of options.
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 6:01 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 1:21 PM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>> Before we base thousands of VM image clones off of one or more snapshots, I
>> want to test what happens when the snapshot becomes corrupted. I don't
>>
Can't this be done in parallel? If the OSD doesn't have an object then
it is a noop and should be pretty quick. The number of outstanding
operations can be limited to 100 or a 1000 which would provide a
balance between speed and performance impact if there is data to be
trimmed. I'm not a big fan o
options...it does not look like I've enabled
> anything special in terms of mount options.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Shain
>
>
> Shain Miley | Manager of Systems and Infrastructure, Digital Media |
> smi...@npr.org | 202.513.3649
>
> _
What fs are you running inside the RBD?
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 8:29 AM, Shain Miley wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We currently have a 12 node (3 monitor+9 OSD) ceph cluster, made up of 107 x
> 4TB drives formatted with xfs. The cluster is running ceph version 0.80.7:
>
> Cluster health:
> cluster 504b5794-
Jan 6, 2015 at 4:19 PM, Josh Durgin wrote:
> On 01/06/2015 10:24 AM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>>
>> Can't this be done in parallel? If the OSD doesn't have an object then
>> it is a noop and should be pretty quick. The number of outstanding
>> operations can be li
Monitors are in charge of the CRUSH map. When ever there is a change
to the CRUSH map, an OSD goes down, a new OSD is added, PGs are
increased, etc, the monitor(s) builds a new CRUSH map and distributes
it to all clients and OSDs. Once the client has the CRUSH map, it does
not need to contact the m
Seems like a message bus would be nice. Each opener of an RBD could
subscribe for messages on the bus for that RBD. Anytime the map is modified
a message could be put on the bus to update the others. That opens up a
whole other can of worms though.
Robert LeBlanc
Sent from a mobile device please
y heavy
> directories at this point.
>
> Also...one thing I just noticed is that the 'ls |wc' returns right
> away...even in cases when right after that I do an 'ls -l' and it takes a
> while.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Shain
>
> Shain Miley | Manager
On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 10:55 PM, Christian Balzer wrote:
> Which of course begs the question of why not having min_size at 1
> permanently, so that in the (hopefully rare) case of loosing 2 OSDs at the
> same time your cluster still keeps working (as it should with a size of 3).
The idea is that
Anyone have a reference for documentation to get Ceph to be a backend for Swift?
Thanks,
Robert LeBlanc
___
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Christian Balzer wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 11:41:37 -0700 Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> Which of course currently means a strongly consistent lockup in these
> scenarios. ^o^
That is one way of putting it
> Slightly off-topic and snarky, that strong consi
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Nico Schottelius
wrote:
> Even though I do not like the fact that we lost a pg for
> an unknown reason, I would prefer ceph to handle that case to recover to
> the best possible situation.
>
> Namely I wonder if we can integrate a tool that shows
> which (parts of)
HJ6bjO5V1W8uWGXTNFnaGbqS4v3mWk
ge1qukr9et0Su0llUb8Rz3hCDqD6PfMJpquBTAB/kaanS+t0pi+00wxu7zzB
zVQ/
=v4sY
-END PGP SIGNATURE-----
----
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 3:21 AM, Nick Fisk wrote:
> I think this may b
Still more work to do, but wanted to share my findings.
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
- -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Thanks for the responses.
I forg
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Just about how funny "ceph problems" are fixed by changing network
configurations.
- --------
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Ian Colle wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
I would check that the /var/lib/ceph/osd/ceph-0/ is mounted and has
the file structure for Ceph.
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 2:16 AM, Aaron wrote
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Has straw2 landed in the kernel and if so which version?
Thanks,
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: Mailvelope v1.0.2
Comment: https
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
My notes show that it should have landed in 4.1, but I also have
written down that it wasn't merged yet. Just trying to get a
confirmation on the version that it did land in.
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD
oes backfill/recovery bypass the journal?
Thanks,
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: Mailvelope v1.0.2
Comment: https://www.mailvelope.com
wsFcBAEBCAAQBQJV8e5qCRDmVDuy+mK58QAAaIwQAMN5DJlhr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Do the recovery options kick in when there is only backfill going on?
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Somnath Roy wrote:
> Try all th
urnal, but there would have to be
some logic if the obect was changed as it was being replicated. Maybe
just a log in the journal that the objects are starting restore and
finished restore, then the journal flush knows if it needs to commit
the write?
- --------
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
I was out of the office for a few days. We have some more hosts to
add. I'll send some logs for examination.
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 12:
GxS
d4frVCFJYXZ+5d8b7dYTU5mbqKe59yEPq3yjAOIZPL9PWn1jHfgjylvOMyMw
hihd
=GGct
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--------
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 10:12 AM, John-Paul Robinson wrote:
> Christian,
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> I gu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
What are your iptable rules?
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 1:01 AM, Stefan Eriksson wrote:
> hi here is the info, I have added "ceph osd pool
, it seems to not increment.
What am I missing that causes the pgmap to change? Do these pgmap
changes have to be computed by the monitors and distributed to the
clients? Does the pgmap change constitute a CRUSH algorithm change?
Thanks,
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4
p the necessary ceph config items (ceph.conf and the OSD bootstrap
keys).
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Martin Palma wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is it a good idea to use a software raid for t
es to test a high
number of clones.
Thanks,
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: Mailvelope v1.1.0
Comment: https://www.mailvelope.com
wsFcBAEBCAAQBQJV/FISCRDmVDuy+mK58QAAsgsP/1WSFOHSkcVy6O582ECf
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Created request http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/13163
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 12:06 PM, John Spray wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 7:04
case. My strongest recommendation
is not to have swap if it is a pure OSD node.
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 8:15 PM, 张冬卯 wrote:
> yes, a raid1 system disk is necessary, from my perspective.
>
&
hod be available in Jewell? Is
the current approach still being developed?
Thanks,
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: Mailvelope v1.1.0
Comment: https://www.mailvelope.com
wsFcBA
l the blocked I/O and then it was fine after rejoining the
cluster. Increasing what logs and to what level would be most
beneficial in this case for troubleshooting?
I hope this makes sense, it has been a long day.
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E
. Then set the
old disk to 'out'. This will keep the OSD participating in the
backfills until it is empty. Once the backfill is done, stop the old
OSD and remove it from the cluster.
- --------
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On S
SIGNATURE-
--------
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Wouter De Borger wrote:
> Ok, so if I understand correctly, for replication level 3 or 4 I would have
> to use the rule
>
> rule replicated_rules
fcmW8/R7Wwe
PubXTM3zNS3j3Fl4/+MZS1T3qNlKEMk+jWRC5nYwE7e1aomABY0QbHHGxgPK
pFl9sm9cOKfWCRXQX4w7mMRspiMosW1X1WbmLe2cU17xtudc0rsEZycPOt3n
XCwin7/+yxKwp/MSWCk/vR/pY7Q/73Pi4kKRzXpFHLpJnteZ3moATTmuSSQm
3Ggb
=SJmS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A
og.xz .
Thanks,
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> We had another incident of 100 long blocked I/O th
ssd' is tier for rbd"
- ----
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Wang, Zhiqiang wrote:
> I remember previously I can delete the cache pool without flushing/evicting
> all the objects first. The way
OUv59V4i0zz
/I6cfzbtySewINjUwFpc6OnJJHEYkse10caBWPrK34oIXQNS2K9uw+vxo/zV
sy/ciuiD2d8HgaOaC04a4dhfPq4vxTsJk940qxo0HHUCwckC9XXbwefuUicz
9R2C6/GTi7RmbfyPJcAZcxFSxSHsWcr5fYO0ZQC2bS0eknw/RV7nrTttiPO7
Jd3lMyzfB3561sbrpEMwuWgnfFWK8ptqdUxcWf+aiUPLdf11Jeh0vEmjS831
n2sbuAhgHBJajerPi4PClE0mCXmCZMNdI1BXDD7E7c4Mnr3/1tWQeqwQLq4V
pF/+
=q3c/
-END P
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 9:49 PM, Wang, Zhiqiang wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com] On Behalf Of
>> Robert LeBlanc
>> Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 12
[stat,set-alloc-hint
object_size 8388608 write_size 8388608,write 3235840~4096] 17.118f0c67
ack+ondisk+write+known_if_redirected e57590) currently waiting for rw
locks
----
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 7
p faster or CRUSH can't figure out how to
distribute balanced data in an unbalanced way. You will probably want
to look at primary affinity. This talks about SSD, but the same
principle applies
http://www.sebastien-han.fr/blog/2015/08/06/ceph-get-the-best-of-your-ssd-with-primary-affinity/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
I think you will be OK, but you should double check on a test cluster.
You should be able to revert the rulesets if the data isn't found.
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
O
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
If I recall, there was a bug or two that was found with cache tiers
and snapshots and were fixed. I hope it is being backported to Hammer.
I don't know if this exactly fixes your issue.
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2
well
(and any other spindles that have journals on it), or flush the
journal and create a new one on the destination host.
If you are using dm-crypt, you also need to save the encryption key as
it is not on the OSD FS for obvious reasons.
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4
UawQ4bRnyz7zlHXQANlL1t7iF
/QakoriydMW3l2WPftk4kDt4egFGhxxrCRZfA0TnVNx1DOLE9vRBKXKgTr0j
miB0Ca9v9DQzVnTWhPCTfb8UdEHzozMTMEv30V3nskafPolsRJmjO04C1K7e
61R+cawG02J0RQqFMMNj3X2Gnbp/CC6JzUpQ5JPvNrvO34lcTYBWkdfwtolg
9ExB
=hAcJ
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
----
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 F
f
=kYQ2
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
----
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>&g
lkf1y3a4sdqHQwJ+Ew3rONilixC0abHw+GF29GjCXbYDBUeLxXoqIJXQbM
TGsOz4v0AnDLzgFQIaSHyweuptyh8MKT3XJbrOOAcmZo3YmGtYYfjSF6+qXF
6PLJ
=HIRW
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--------
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 8:09 AM, Gregory Farnum
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
What does `ceph-disk list` report for the partition? You may need to
run `partprobe /dev/sdb`. If ceph-disk list shows prepared, then just
run `ceph-disk activate /dev/sdb1`.
-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904
WV+7V1oIzIYvWHyl2QpBq
4/ZwVjQ43qLfuDTS4o+IJ4ztOMd26vIv6Mn6WVwKCjoCXJc8ajywR9Dy+6lL
o8oJ+tn7hMc9Qy1iBhu3/QIP4WCsUf9RVeu60oahNEpde89qW32S9CZlrJDO
gf4iTryRjkAhdmZIj9JiaE8jQ6dvN817D9cqs/CXKV9vhzYoM7p5YWHghBKB
J3hS
=0J7F
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E6
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
4.2.0-1.el7.elrepo.x86_64
- -
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Samuel Just wrote:
> I looked
liable for ping, but still had the
blocked I/O.
I reduced the MTU to 1500 and checked pings (OK), but I'm still seeing
the blocked I/O.
- --------
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> O
jFcNP293H7/DC0mqpnmo0Clx3jkdHX+x1EXpJUtocSeI44LX
KWIMhe9wXtKAoHQFEcJ0o0+wrXWMevvx33HPC4q1ULrFX0ILNx5Mo0Rp944X
4OEo
=P33I
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
--------
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Robert LeBl
n't
trying to congest things. We probably already saw this issue, just
didn't know it.
- --------
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Mark Nelson wrote:
> FWIW, we've got some 40GbE
that. There is also a limit
to the size of an object that can be stored. I think I've seen the
number of 100GB thrown around.
- --------
Robert LeBlanc
PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904 C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 7:04 PM, Cory Hawkless wrote:
>
201 - 300 of 492 matches
Mail list logo
