The crush map changing causes a change in the osdmap version, I'm pretty
sure.

On 06/08/2015 12:50 PM, Handzik, Joe wrote:
> From what I see in the source file, we'd want to fix 'osd crush dump' somehow 
> too, right? I can take a look while I'm working in this area to see what I 
> can accomplish. 
> 
> Joe
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Spray [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2015 7:39 PM
> To: Handzik, Joe; Sage Weil
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Dan Mick ([email protected])
> Subject: Re: Thoughts about metadata exposure in Calamari
> 
> 
> 
> On 05/06/2015 20:33, Handzik, Joe wrote:
>> I err in the direction of calling 'osd metadata' too, but it does mean that 
>> Calamari will need to add that call in (I'll leave it to Gregory to say if 
>> that is particularly undesirable). Do you think it would be worthwhile to 
>> better define the metadata bundle into a structure, or is it ok to leave it 
>> as a set of string pairs?
> 
> Versioning of the metadata is something to consider. The "osd metadata" 
> stuff is outside the osdmap epochs, so anything that is consuming 
> updates to it is stuck with doing some kind of full polling as it 
> stands.  It might be that some better interface with versions+deltas is 
> needed for a management layer to efficiently consume it.
> 
> A version concept where the version is incremented when an OSD starts or 
> updates its metadata could make synchronization with a management layer 
> much more efficient.  Efficiency matters here when we're calling on the 
> mons to serialize data for potentially 10000s of OSDs into JSON whenever 
> the management layer wants an update.
> 
> John
> 

--
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

Reply via email to