I would suggest 2GB partitions for WAL partitions and 150GB osds to make an
SSD only pool for the fs metadata pool. I know that doesn't use the whole
disk, but there's no need or reason to. By under-provisioning the nvme it
just adds that much more longevity to the life of the drive.

You cannot change the size of any part of a bluestore osd after creation.

On Sat, May 12, 2018, 3:09 PM Oliver Schulz <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Dear David,
>
> On 11.05.2018 22:10, David Turner wrote:
> > For if you should do WAL only on the NVMe vs use a filestore journal,
> > that depends on your write patterns, use case, etc.
>
> we mostly use CephFS, for scientific data processing. It's
> mainly larger files (10 MB to 10 GB, but sometimes also
> a bunch of small files), typically written once, and read
> several times. We also keep Singularity software container
> images on CephFS, here the read patterns are more scattered.
>
> We currently have about 1PB raw capacity on ca. 150 OSDs, and
> I'll add another 45 OSDs with 10 TB disks now. The old
> OSDs are all filestore, I'm planning to to switch them
> over to bluestore bit by bit once the new OSDs are online.
>
>
> > that ceph will prioritize things such that the WAL won't spill over at
> > all and just have the DB going over to the HDD.  I didn't want to deal
> > with speed differentials between OSDs.
>
> So would it make sense to just assign 15GB SSD partition
> for WAL+DB per 10TB OSD (more I don't have available),
> and let the DB spill over?
>
> Or do you think it would make for more predictable/uniform
> OSD performance to  a few TB WAL and always keep the DB on
> the HDDs (like in your cluster), for our use case?
>
> Or should I try to use a 2 TB WAL and a 13 TB DB partition
> per 10 TB OSD - maybe 13 TB for DB is just way too small to
> give any benefit , here?
>
> One important question - is it possible to change WAL and
> DB later on without deleting and re-creating the OSD(s)?
>
>
> > The troubleshooting slow requests of that just sounds awful.
>
> So true!
>
>
> Thanks again for all the advice,
>
> Oliver
>
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to