I'm testing multi realm features according to official multisite( http://docs.ceph.com/docs/jewel/radosgw/multisite/) doc, but after set up a zone-group and zone, every time I run radosgw-admin command, it will print an error mesage:
> 2016-12-05 16:19:21.117371 7f85beec59c0 0 error in read_id for id : (2) No such file or directory This vaguely error message seems start to appear after I run `radosgw-admin zonegroup delete --rgw-zonegroup=default` command. What can I do to fix this? Thank you. On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 8:39 AM, piglei <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you Abhishek, I will take a look at Realm soon. BTW, what's your > point on the multi-tenancy combined nginx rules solution? > > AFAIK, Ceph's multi-tenancy feature seems like a replacement of adding > prefix for user/bucket name manually. It only avoids name conflict across > different tenants, but lacks the ability of real isolation of user data. > What do you think? > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 10:07 PM, Abhishek L <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> piglei writes: >> >> > Hi, I am a ceph newbie. I want to create two isolated rgw services in a >> single ceph cluster, the requirements: >> > >> > * Two radosgw will have different hosts, such as radosgw-x.site.com >> and radosgw-y.site.com. File uploaded to rgw-xcannot be accessed via >> rgw-y. >> > * Isolated bucket and user namespaces is not necessary, because I could >> prepend term to bucket name and user name, like "x-bucket" or "y-bucket" >> > >> > At first I thought region and zone may be the solution, but after a >> little more researchs, I found that region and zone are for different geo >> locations, they share the same metadata (buckets and users) and objects >> instead of isolated copies. >> > >> > After that I noticed ceph's multi-tenancy feature since jewel release, >> which is probably what I'm looking for, here is my solution using >> multi-tenancy: >> > >> > * using two tenant called x and y, each rgw service matches one tenant. >> > * Limit incoming requests to rgw in it's own tenant, which means you >> can only retrieve resources belongs to buckets "x:bucket" when >> callingradosgw-x.site.com. This can be archived by some custom nginx >> rules. >> > >> > Is this the right approach or Should I just use two different clusters >> instead? Looking forward to your awesome advises. >> > >> >> Since jewel, you can also consider looking into realms which sort of >> provide for isolated namespaces within a zone or zonegroup. >> >> -- >> Abhishek >> > >
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
