That part is harmless, the transaction would be recreated for the new acting set taking into account the new acting set features. It doesn't have any actual affect on the contents of the object. -Sam
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Gregory Farnum <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Samuel Just <[email protected]> wrote: >> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/9419 >> >> librbd unconditionally sends set_alloc_hint. Do we require that users >> upgrade the osds first? Also, should the primary respond with >> ENOTSUPP if any replicas don't support it? > > Something closer to the second option, I think...but then you run into > the problem where maybe the PG gets moved from a set of new OSDs to a > set of old ones that don't support the op. :/ I think for anything > that goes to disk you need to go through a full features-in-the-osdmap > process like we did for erasure coding. > -Greg > Software Engineer #42 @ http://inktank.com | http://ceph.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
