We tested an upgrade from 0.94.3 to 0.94.7 and experienced issues when the librbd clients were not upgraded first in the process. It was a while back and I don't remember the specific issues, but upgrading the clients prior to upgrading any services worked in that case.
Recently we tested an upgrade from 0.94.7 to 10.2.3 and found exactly the opposite. Upgrading the clients first worked for many operations, but we got "function not implemented" errors when we would try to clone RBD snapshots. We re-tested that upgrade with the clients being upgraded after all of the services and everything worked fine for us in that case. The caveat there is that you must keep your CRUSH tunables at firefly or hammer until the clients are upgraded. At any rate, we've had different experiences upgrading the clients at different points in the process depending on the releases involved. The key is to test first and make sure you have a sane upgrade path before doing anything in production. ________________________________ [cid:[email protected]]<https://storagecraft.com> Steve Taylor | Senior Software Engineer | StorageCraft Technology Corporation<https://storagecraft.com> 380 Data Drive Suite 300 | Draper | Utah | 84020 Office: 801.871.2799 | ________________________________ If you are not the intended recipient of this message or received it erroneously, please notify the sender and delete it, together with any attachments, and be advised that any dissemination or copying of this message is prohibited. ________________________________ -----Original Message----- From: ceph-users [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of J David Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 12:46 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [ceph-users] Out-of-date RBD client libraries What are the potential consequences of using out-of-date client libraries with RBD against newer clusters? Specifically, what are the potential ill-effects of using Firefly client libraries (0.80.7 and 0.80.8) to access Hammer or Jewel (10.2.3) clusters? The upgrading instructions ( http://docs.ceph.com/docs/jewel/install/upgrading-ceph/ ) don’t actually mention clients, just giving the recommended order as: ceph-deploy, mons, osds, mds, object gateways. Are long-running RBD clients (like Qemu virtual machines) placed at risk of instability or data corruption if they are not updated and restarted before, during, or after such an upgrade? If so, what are the potential consequences, and where in the process should they be upgraded to avoid those consequences? Thanks for any advice! _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list [email protected] 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
