This bug was fixed in the package ceph - 0.80.1-0ubuntu1
---
ceph (0.80.1-0ubuntu1) trusty; urgency=medium
* New upstream release stable point release (LP: #1278466).
ceph (0.80-0ubuntu1) trusty; urgency=medium
* New upstream release stable release (LP: #1278466).
-- James Page
** Tags removed: verification-needed
** Tags added: verification-done
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1278466
Title:
[FFe] ceph firefly stable release
To manage notific
EC pool is 3+1, and cache is with 2 replicas. default crush rules.
I decreased cache to few gigs and [semi]idle cpu usage decreased
dramaticaly. So I think it is not a bug, but related to how cache works.
I think we can call it "verification-done", unless someone else have
objections?
--
You re
@Henrik
I can try - do you have some details on how you setup EC + cache pools
so I can reproduce as closely as possible?
Also is the cluster actually idle? or is it staging data to/from the EC
pool which would consume CPU resources?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a membe
I just recently upgraded to proposed 0.80.1 instead of ppa.
There are no scrubbing problems in new version.
But my cpu problem looks like is not solved. I suspect cache or erasure
coded pools are responsible for problem. But currently I also doing
backfilling and data migration so I am not comple
@Shang - the 0.80.x series will be supported for 5 years; however I
expect most users will want something newer by +2 years, at which point
the Ceph version from 16.04 will be available via the Ubuntu Cloud
Archive - interim stable release will also be made available but only
with 18 months of supp
I've deployed the proposed package for 0.80.1 on a 25 node cluster and
soaked it with IO's for 24 hours - no problems.
I've also deployed a smaller cluster with OpenStack Icehouse and run the
Cinder tempest API test suite against it - again no problems found.
@Henrik - it would be good to get con
Shang, as I understand it, yes, since 0.80 is going into trusty proper,
it should be supported as long as Trusty is. Per
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Releases that is April 2019. (That's not to say
that Trusty won't update to an even newer version as part of that
support process--it certainly could.) I
Will 0.80 be supported for 5 years ?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1278466
Title:
[FFe] ceph firefly stable release
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
http
** Changed in: ceph (Ubuntu)
Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1278466
Title:
[FFe] ceph firefly stable release
To manage not
Hello James, or anyone else affected,
Accepted ceph into trusty-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at http://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ceph/0.80.1-0ubuntu1 in
a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wiki.ubu
http://ceph.com/releases/v0-80-1-firefly-released/
scrubing:
"osd: revert incomplete scrub fix (Samuel Just)"
about cpu usage, I think this one (but not sure, but I use tiering and disks
were idle when CPU usage was high, also OSD restart didn't help (tried twice),
upgrade to 0.80.1 helped, all
Henrik, can you please reference the bugs fixed (mentioned above). I'm
looking through the git log and not seeing anything specifically
addressing this.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launch
hi,
I tested proposed packages on my cluster. I hit 2 bugs with it:
some PGs stuck in deep-scrub
high cpu usage on OSDs
I upgraded to 0.80.1 from PPA, cpu bug did not occur there yet, will see
about deep-scrubing. These bugs are known for upstream and were
addressed in 0.80.1. I suggest moving 0.
Hello James, or anyone else affected,
Accepted ceph into trusty-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at http://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ceph/0.80-0ubuntu1 in a
few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wiki.ubunt
I've smoked the proposed 0.80 binaries in a 26 node ceph cluster for the
last 12 hours using the smalliorbd test; read/write was sustained at a
consistent rate for the duration of the test.
Uploading to -proposed for SRU team review.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member
Synced from Debian for utopic
** Changed in: ceph (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1278466
Title:
[FFe] ceph firefly
0.80 was released today; I've uploaded to the PPA and will do testing
tomorrow.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1278466
Title:
[FFe] ceph firefly stable release
To mana
For anyone following this bug waiting for firefly, I've pushed the
0.80~rc1 to:
https://launchpad.net/~ceph-ubuntu/+archive/edgers
Tests OK on a 25 node setup.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
https://
** Changed in: ubuntu-release-notes
Status: New => Fix Released
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1278466
Title:
[FFe] ceph firefly stable release
To manage notifi
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/ceph
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1278466
Title:
[FFe] ceph firefly stable release
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://
This bug was fixed in the package ceph - 0.79-0ubuntu1
---
ceph (0.79-0ubuntu1) trusty; urgency=medium
* New upstream release (LP: #1278466):
- d/p/modules.patch: Refreshed.
- d/ceph.install: Install all jerasure modules.
-- James PageWed, 09 Apr 2014 11:14:03 +0100
**
** Changed in: ceph (Ubuntu Trusty)
Status: Fix Released => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1278466
Title:
[FFe] ceph firefly stable release
To manag
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/trusty-proposed/ceph
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1278466
Title:
[FFe] ceph firefly stable release
To manage notifications about this bug
I've prepared and tested an update to 0.79; you can see the package
builds in:
https://launchpad.net/~ceph-ubuntu/+archive/edgers
Using these packages, I deployed Ceph 0.79 as part of an OpenStack
deployment using Cinder for volume management and ran the entire Tempest
volume API test suite aga
Just a note for early adopters to beware of:
https://ceph.com/releases/v0-78-released/
"Please note that while it is possible to create and test erasure coded
pools in this release, the pools will not be usable when you upgrade to
v0.79 as the OSDMap encoding will subtlely change. Please do not
po
** Changed in: ubuntu-release-notes
Assignee: (unassigned) => James Page (james-page)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1278466
Title:
[FFe] ceph firefly stable relea
Triaged. Keeping bug open pending upstream bugfix release cut.
** Changed in: ceph (Ubuntu Trusty)
Status: New => In Progress
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/127846
Is further action needed here from the release team? There seems to be
an agreed plan, but the bug is marked 'new'.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1278466
Title:
[FFe]
0.78 uploaded to trusty:
ceph (0.78-0ubuntu1) trusty; urgency=medium
* New upstream release:
- d/control: Add xfslib-dev to BD's.
- d/*: Sync relevant packaging changes from upstream.
- d/p/*: Drop upstreamed patches.
- d/p/modules.patch: Mark libcls_user.so and libec_jerasure.s
** Changed in: ceph (Ubuntu Trusty)
Milestone: ubuntu-14.04-beta-2 => ubuntu-14.04
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1278466
Title:
[FFe] ceph firefly stable release
Thanks Daviey
Adding task for release notes so we don't forget; I have 0.77 in local
testing - just waiting for 0.78 and will then upload.
** Also affects: ubuntu-release-notes
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Sage, thanks for your input.
James, If we are committing to Firefly for Trusty, I would suggest
getting 0.78 in ASAP to maximise potential exposure. I agree, with
testing 0.79 in PPA first, but again - we probably want to try and get
it in as soon as possible. That said, if 0.79 is looking late
OK - so the proposed plan is as follows:
1) Update to 0.78 release this week; this will be tested in PPA first.
2) Update to 0.79 on the assumption that it appears in +2 weeks; again
this will be tested in PPA first.
3) SRU the firefly 0.80 release into 14.04 post 17th April.
--
You received t
Dave: correct. There are a few very minor changes going into 0.79 to
make the final CLI/REST API experience good. We expect nothing but
performance and bug fixes for 0.80.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu
James, based on prior history of ceph upstream prior releases and
continuing discussions, can we be confident that 0.79->Firefly will be
bug fix only and not featureful?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
h
Adding ubuntu-sru as they will need to agree to option 2) as laid out in
#5
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to ceph in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1278466
Title:
[FFe] ceph firefly stable release
To manage n
1) stick with current version
I don't think this is a good idea; the emperor release we have in
archive right now is a stable release but is not schedule for long term
focus from upstream.
2) get to firefly in a sane way
I think this is a better approach; interim releases are generally pretty
go
James, thanks for the update.
Based on this, do you think Trusty should:
- Stick with the current version
Or.
- Target 0.78 for release, but then...
- If 0.79 has minimal changes, and improves stability - get that in prior
to release, if the dates make it suitable.
- Review changes be
39 matches
Mail list logo
