Hi Marcin,
Not sure if anyone asked, but are your OSD journals on actual disk or
are you using tmpfs?
Dino
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 4:53 AM, Wido den Hollander w...@widodh.nl wrote:
On 01/16/2013 11:50 AM, Marcin Szukala wrote:
Hi all,
Any ideas how can I resolve my issue? Or where the
Le 16/01/2013 11:53, Wido den Hollander a écrit :
On 01/16/2013 11:50 AM, Marcin Szukala wrote:
Hi all,
Any ideas how can I resolve my issue? Or where the problem is?
Let me describe the issue.
Host boots up and maps RBD image with XFS filesystems
Host mounts the filesystems from the RBD
Hi Dino,
journals are on dedicated SSD
Regard,
Marcin
2013/1/16 Dino Yancey dino2...@gmail.com:
Hi Marcin,
Not sure if anyone asked, but are your OSD journals on actual disk or
are you using tmpfs?
Dino
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 4:53 AM, Wido den Hollander w...@widodh.nl wrote:
On
2013/1/16 Yann Dupont yann.dup...@univ-nantes.fr:
Le 16/01/2013 11:53, Wido den Hollander a écrit :
On 01/16/2013 11:50 AM, Marcin Szukala wrote:
Hi all,
Any ideas how can I resolve my issue? Or where the problem is?
Let me describe the issue.
Host boots up and maps RBD image with XFS
Can we use this doc as a reference for the upgrade?
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/blob/eb02eaede53c03579d015ca00a888a48dbab739a/doc/install/upgrading-ceph.rst
Thanks.
--
Regards,
Sébastien Han.
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Sage Weil s...@inktank.com wrote:
That there are some critical
Hi Sage,
On 01/15/2013 07:55 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
Hi Jim-
I just realized this didn't make it into our tree. It's now in testing,
and will get merged in the next window. D'oh!
That's great news - thanks for the update.
-- Jim
sage
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
Hi List,
i tried to upgrade my ceph cluster from 0.47.2 (openSuSE buildservice
for SLES 11 SP2) to 0.56.1 (ceph.com/rpm/sles11/)
At first I updated only one server (mon.b / osd.2) and restartet ceph
on this server. After a short time /etc/init.d/ceph -a status showed
not running
for
Hi,
I'm testing a small Ceph cluster with Asus C60M1-1 mainboards.
The setup is:
- AMD Fusion C60 CPU
- 8GB DDR3
- 1x Intel 520 120GB SSD (OS + Journaling)
- 4x 1TB disk
I had two of these systems running, but yesterday I wanted to add a
third one.
So I had 8 OSDs (one per disk) running on
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013, S?bastien Han wrote:
Can we use this doc as a reference for the upgrade?
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/blob/eb02eaede53c03579d015ca00a888a48dbab739a/doc/install/upgrading-ceph.rst
Yeah. It's pretty simple in this case (since it's a point release
upgrade):
- install new
FWIW, my ceph data dirs (for e.g. mons) are all on XFS. I've
experienced a lot of corruption on these on power loss to the node --
and in some cases even when power wasn't lost, and the box was simply
rebooted. This is on Ubuntu 12.04 with the ceph-provied 3.6.3 kernel
(as I'm using RBD on these).
Hi,
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013, Andrey Korolyov wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 4:58 AM, Chen, Xiaoxi xiaoxi.c...@intel.com wrote:
Hi list,
We are suffering from OSD or OS down when there is continuing high
pressure on the Ceph rack.
Basically we are on Ubuntu 12.04+ Ceph
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013, Wido den Hollander wrote:
On 01/16/2013 11:50 AM, Marcin Szukala wrote:
Hi all,
Any ideas how can I resolve my issue? Or where the problem is?
Let me describe the issue.
Host boots up and maps RBD image with XFS filesystems
Host mounts the filesystems from
Thanks Sage!
--
Regards,
Sébastien Han.
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 5:39 PM, Sage Weil s...@inktank.com wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013, S?bastien Han wrote:
Can we use this doc as a reference for the upgrade?
Op 16 jan. 2013 om 18:00 heeft Sage Weil s...@inktank.com het volgende
geschreven:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013, Wido den Hollander wrote:
On 01/16/2013 11:50 AM, Marcin Szukala wrote:
Hi all,
Any ideas how can I resolve my issue? Or where the problem is?
Let me describe the issue.
Host
On 01/16/2013 03:46 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote:
2013/1/16 Sage Weil s...@inktank.com:
This sort of configuration effectively bundles the disk and SSD into a
single unit, where the failure of either results in the loss of both.
From Ceph's
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:35 PM, Andrey Korolyov and...@xdel.ru wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 8:58 PM, Sage Weil s...@inktank.com wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013, Andrey Korolyov wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 4:58 AM, Chen, Xiaoxi xiaoxi.c...@intel.com wrote:
Hi list,
We are
On 01/03/2013 03:34 PM, Alex Elder wrote:
This series simplifies some handling of osd client message
handling by using an initialized ceph_pagelist structure
to refer to the trail portion of a ceph_osd_request rather
than using a null pointer to represent not there.
On 01/03/2013 02:55 PM, Alex Elder wrote:
Pull a block of code that initializes the layout structure in an osd
request into its own function so it can be reused.
Signed-off-by: Alex Elder el...@inktank.com
---
Reviewed-by: Josh Durgin josh.dur...@inktank.com
drivers/block/rbd.c | 23
On 01/04/2013 06:31 AM, Alex Elder wrote:
This series mostly cleans up parameters used by functions
in libceph, in the osd client code.
-Alex
[PATCH REPOST 1/6] libceph: pass length to ceph_osdc_build_request()
[PATCH REPOST 2/6] libceph: pass length to
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 5:52 AM, Gregory Farnum g...@inktank.com wrote:
My biggest concern with this was how it worked on cluster with
multiple data pools, and Sage's initial response was to either
1) create an object for each inode that lives in the metadata pool,
and holds the backtraces
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Sam Lang sam.l...@inktank.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Gregory Farnum g...@inktank.com wrote:
My biggest concern with this was how it worked on cluster with
multiple data pools, and Sage's initial response was to either
1) create an object for
Hi Yan,
I reviewed these on the plane last night and they look good. There was
one small cleanup I pushed on top of wip-mds (in ceph.git). I'll run this
through our (still limited) fs suite and then merge into master.
Thanks!
sage
On Fri, 4 Jan 2013, Yan, Zheng wrote:
From: Yan, Zheng
On Thu, 17 Jan 2013, Chen, Xiaoxi wrote:
Hi Sage?
Both CPU and Memory utilization are very low. CPU is ~ 20% (with
60% IOWAIT), Memory is far more less . I have 32 Core Sandybridege
CPU(64 Core for HT), together with 128GB RAM per node.
Hmm!
-Original Message-
From: Sage
On 01/04/2013 06:43 AM, Alex Elder wrote:
An osd request can be made up of multiple ops, all of which are
completed (or not) transactionally. There is partial support for
multiple ops in an rbd request in the rbd code, but it's incomplete
and not even supported by the osd client or the
On 01/04/2013 06:51 AM, Alex Elder wrote:
Currently every osd request submitted by the rbd code undergoes a
file mapping operation, which is common with what the ceph file system
uses. But some analysis shows that there is no need to do this for
rbd, because it already takes care of its own
On 01/04/2013 06:46 AM, Alex Elder wrote:
The flags field of struct ceph_osd_req_op is never used, so just get
rid of it.
Signed-off-by: Alex Elder el...@inktank.com
---
Reviewed-by: Josh Durgin josh.dur...@inktank.com
include/linux/ceph/osd_client.h |1 -
1 file changed, 1
On 01/04/2013 06:54 AM, Alex Elder wrote:
Each osd message includes a layout structure, and for rbd it is
always the same (at least for osd's in a given pool).
Initialize a layout structure when an rbd_dev gets created and just
copy that into osd requests for the rbd image.
Replace an
On 01/04/2013 06:55 AM, Alex Elder wrote:
The rbd_req_sync_watch() and rbd_req_sync_unwatch() functions are
nearly identical. Combine them into a single function with a flag
indicating whether a watch is to be initiated or torn down.
Signed-off-by: Alex Elder el...@inktank.com
---
On 01/04/2013 07:07 AM, Alex Elder wrote:
The two remaining osd ops used by rbd are CEPH_OSD_OP_WATCH and
CEPH_OSD_OP_NOTIFY_ACK. Move the setup of those operations into
rbd_osd_req_op_create(), and get rid of rbd_create_rw_op() and
rbd_destroy_op().
Signed-off-by: Alex Elder el...@inktank.com
On 01/04/2013 07:03 AM, Alex Elder wrote:
This series consolidates and encapsulates the setup of all
osd requests into a single function which takes variable
arguments appropriate for the type of request. The result
groups together common code idioms and I think makes the
spots that build these
On 01/04/2013 07:07 AM, Alex Elder wrote:
Both rbd_req_sync_op() and rbd_do_request() have a linger
parameter, which is the address of a pointer that should refer to
the osd request structure used to issue a request to an osd.
Only one case ever supplies a non-null linger argument: an
On 01/16/2013 10:23 PM, Josh Durgin wrote:
On 01/04/2013 07:07 AM, Alex Elder wrote:
The two remaining osd ops used by rbd are CEPH_OSD_OP_WATCH and
CEPH_OSD_OP_NOTIFY_ACK. Move the setup of those operations into
rbd_osd_req_op_create(), and get rid of rbd_create_rw_op() and
Hi Mark,
Am 16.01.2013 um 22:53 schrieb Mark
With only 2 SSDs for 12 spinning disks, you'll need to make sure the SSDs are
really fast. I use Intel 520s for testing which are great, but I wouldn't
use them in production.
Why not? I use them for a ssd only ceph cluster.
Stefan--
To
Some update summary for tested case till now:
Ceph is v0.56.1
1. RBD:Ubuntu 13.04 + 3.7Kernel
OSD:Ubuntu 13.04 + 3.7Kernel
XFS
Result: Kernel Panic on both RBD and OSD sides
2. RBD:Ubuntu 13.04 +3.2Kernel
OSD:Ubuntu 13.04 +3.2Kernel
XFS
On 01/15/2013 06:21 PM, Josh Durgin wrote:
On 01/15/2013 02:10 AM, Loic Dachary wrote:
On 01/14/2013 06:26 PM, Josh Durgin wrote:
Looking at how it's run automatically might help:
https://github.com/ceph/teuthology/blob/master/teuthology/coverage.py#L88
You should also add 'coverage:
Hi,
I'm happy to report that running teuthology to get a lcov code coverage report
worked for me.
http://dachary.org/wp-uploads/2013/01/teuthology/total/mon/Monitor.cc.gcov.html
It took me a while to figure out the logic (thanks Josh for the help :-). I
wrote a HOWTO explaining the steps in
36 matches
Mail list logo
