On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 1:09 PM Anthony D'Atri <ada...@digitalocean.com> wrote: > > Thanks! I'll do some experimentation. Our orchestration service might need > an overhaul to manage parents / children together. > > Related question, in this thread: > > https://www.spinics.net/lists/ceph-users/msg35257.html > > there was discussion of rate limiting. I have a 4TB migration going right > now that's writing at around 900MB/s, so this is of keen interest.
There isn't any rate-limiting available for rbd-mirror as of yet, but it's on the backlog. The linked email thread talked about the per-pool configuration overrides, and that will be available in Nautilus via the new "rbd config global/pool/image ..." commands. > > > On Feb 26, 2019, at 5:27 PM, Jason Dillaman <jdill...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 7:49 PM Anthony D'Atri <ada...@digitalocean.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> Hello again. > >> > >> I have a couple of questions about rbd-mirror that I'm hoping you can help > >> me with. > >> > >> > >> 1) http://docs.ceph.com/docs/mimic/rbd/rbd-snapshot/ indicates that > >> protecting is required for cloning. We somehow had the notion that this > >> had been / will be done away with, but don't remember where we saw that. > >> Thoughts? > > > > By default, if the cluster is configured to to require mimic or later > > clients, you no longer need to protect/unprotect snapshots prior to > > cloning [1]. The documentation still talks about > > protecting/unprotecting snapshots since the new clone v2 format isn't > > currently enabled by default in order to preserve backwards > > compatibility to older librbd/krbd clients. Once we no longer support > > upgrading from pre-Mimic releases, we can enable clone v2 by default > > and start deprecating snapshot protect/unprotect features. > > > >> 2) We're currently running 12.2.2 on our cluster nodes, with rbd-mirror > >> running in a container built against 12.2.8. Should we expect images with > >> clones / parents to successfully migrate with rbd-mirror? I've had a few > >> rude awakenings here where I've flattened to remove the dependency, but in > >> the general case would rather not have to sacrifice the underlying > >> capacity. > > > > Yes, thinly provisioned cloned images have always been supported with > > RBD mirroring (Jewel release). You do, however, need to ensure that > > the parent image has mirroring enabled. > > > >> > >> > >> > >> Context: We aren't using rbd-mirror for DR, we're using it to move > >> volumes between clusters for capacity management. > >> > >> Hope to see you at Cephalocon. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Anthony D'Atri > >> Storage Engineer > >> 425-343-5133 > >> ada...@digitalocean.com > >> ________________________________ > >> We're Hiring! | @digitalocean | linkedin > >> > > > > [1] https://ceph.com/community/new-mimic-simplified-rbd-image-cloning/ > > > > -- > > Jason > -- Jason _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
