The terminology we're using to describe CephFS in Jewel is "stable" as opposed to production ready.
Thanks, Brett On Monday, May 16, 2016, John Spray <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 5:42 AM, Andrus, Brian Contractor > <[email protected] <javascript:;>> wrote: > > So this ‘production ready’ CephFS for jewel seems a little not quite…. > > > > > > > > Currently I have a single system mounting CephFS and merely scp-ing data > to > > it. > > > > The CephFS mount has 168 TB used, 345 TB / 514 TB avail. > > > > > > > > Every so often, I get a HEALTH_WARN message of mds0: Client failing to > > respond to cache pressure > > What client, what version? > > > Even if I stop the scp, it will not go away until I umount/remount the > > filesystem. > > > > > > > > For testing, I had the cephfs mounted on about 50 systems and when > updated > > started on the, I got all kinds of issues with it all. > > All kinds of issues...? Need more specific bug reports than that to fix > things. > > John > > > I figured having updated run on a few systems would be a good ‘see what > > happens’ if there is a fair amount of access to it. > > > > > > > > So, should I not be even considering using CephFS as a large storage > mount > > for a compute cluster? Is there a sweet spot for what CephFS would be > good > > for? > > > > > > > > > > > > Brian Andrus > > > > ITACS/Research Computing > > > > Naval Postgraduate School > > > > Monterey, California > > > > voice: 831-656-6238 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ceph-users mailing list > > [email protected] <javascript:;> > > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > > > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list > [email protected] <javascript:;> > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
