On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Andrey Korolyov and...@xdel.ru wrote:
Ahem. once on almost empty node same trace produced by qemu
process(which was actually pinned to the specific numa node), so seems
that`s generally is a some scheduler/mm bug, not directly related to
the osd processes. In
On 01/27/2013 11:10 PM, Cesar Mello wrote:
Hi,
Just tried rest-bench. This little tool is wonderful, thanks!
I still have to learn lots of things. So please don't spend much time
explaining me, but instead please give me any pointers to
documentation or source code that can be useful. As a
Check for fuse_getgroups() only in case we have found libfuse already.
Moved the check to the check for --with-fuse.
Small fix: fix string for NO_ATOMIC_OPS, don't use '.
Signed-off-by: Danny Al-Gaaf danny.al-g...@bisect.de
---
configure.ac | 8
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4
Here three patches to fix some issues with the new rbd-fuse
code and an issues with the fuse handling in configure.
Danny Al-Gaaf (3):
configure: fix check for fuse_getgroups()
rbd-fuse: fix usage of conn-want
rbd-fuse: fix printf format for off_t and size_t
configure.ac| 8
Fix printf format for off_t and size_t to print the same on 32 and 64bit
systems. Use PRI* macros from inttypes.h.
Signed-off-by: Danny Al-Gaaf danny.al-g...@bisect.de
---
src/rbd_fuse/rbd-fuse.c | 9 +
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/rbd_fuse/rbd-fuse.c
Fix usage of conn-want and FUSE_CAP_BIG_WRITES. Both need libfuse
version = 2.8. Encapsulate the related code line into a check for
the needed FUSE_VERSION as already done in ceph-fuse in some cases.
Signed-off-by: Danny Al-Gaaf danny.al-g...@bisect.de
---
src/rbd_fuse/rbd-fuse.c | 3 ++-
1 file
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Sam Lang sam.l...@inktank.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Andrey Korolyov and...@xdel.ru wrote:
Ahem. once on almost empty node same trace produced by qemu
process(which was actually pinned to the specific numa node), so seems
that`s generally is a
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 6:28 AM, Joao Eduardo Luis
joao.l...@inktank.com wrote:
On 01/27/2013 11:10 PM, Cesar Mello wrote:
Hi,
Just tried rest-bench. This little tool is wonderful, thanks!
I still have to learn lots of things. So please don't spend much time
explaining me, but instead
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Cesar Mello cme...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Just tried rest-bench. This little tool is wonderful, thanks!
I still have to learn lots of things. So please don't spend much time
explaining me, but instead please give me any pointers to
documentation or source code
Thanks Danny, I'll look at these today.
On Jan 28, 2013, at 7:33 AM, Danny Al-Gaaf danny.al-g...@bisect.de wrote:
Here three patches to fix some issues with the new rbd-fuse
code and an issues with the fuse handling in configure.
Danny Al-Gaaf (3):
configure: fix check for
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 3:55 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta
gandalf.corvotempe...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/1/28 Gandalf Corvotempesta gandalf.corvotempe...@gmail.com:
2013-01-28 12:22:27.759162 7fe8657c3700 0 NOTICE: failed to send
response to client
2013-01-28 12:22:27.759186 7fe8657c3700 0 ERROR:
Sure I can later when I arrive home. With the end of my vacation, I'll
be able to devote a couple of hours after my 3-year-old sleeps. :-)
I guess my laptop hard disk has horrible seek times. I'll repeat the
tests in my desktop as soon as possible.
Thanks a lot for the attention!
Best regards
On Monday, January 28, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Ben Rowland wrote:
Hi,
I'm considering using Ceph to create a cluster across several data
centres, with the strict requirement that writes should go to both
DCs. This seems possible by specifying rules in the CRUSH map, with
an understood latency hit
I'd just noticed utime on my laptop 32-bit build and was trying to figure out
why our 32-bit nightly didn't see it. And Greg had seen the system build
problem where I didn't, and I was isolating differences there as well.
I purposely didn't spend time on the system() error handling because I
Gregory, i recreated the osd down problem again this morning on two nodes
(g13ct, g14ct). First, i created a 1-node cluster on g13ct (with osd.0, 1 ,2)
and then added host g14ct (osd3. 4, 5). osd.1 went down for about 1 minute and
half after adding osd 3, 4, 5 were adde4d. i have included the
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013, Yan, Zheng wrote:
From: Yan, Zheng zheng.z@intel.com
_rename_finish() does not send dentry link/unlink message to replicas.
We should prevent dentries that are modified by the rename operation
from getting new replicas when the rename operation is committing. So
A recent change to rbd prevented rbd devices from being unmapped
when they were in use. However that change did not address a
different, but related problem. It is possible for an open (the
one that would bump the open count from 0 to 1) to begin after
a request to remove the rbd device has
Define a new rbd device flags field, manipulated using bit
operations. Replace the use of the current exists flag with a bit
in this new flags field. Add a little commentary about the
exists flag, which does not need to be manipulated atomically.
Signed-off-by: Alex Elder el...@inktank.com
---
An open request for a mapped rbd image can arrive while removal of
that mapping is underway. We need to prevent such an open request
from succeeding. (It appears that Maciej Galkiewicz ran into this
problem.)
Define and use a removing flag to indicate a mapping is getting
removed. Set it in
Actually Sage merged them into master. Thanks again.
On 01/28/2013 09:45 AM, Dan Mick wrote:
Thanks Danny, I'll look at these today.
On Jan 28, 2013, at 7:33 AM, Danny Al-Gaaf danny.al-g...@bisect.de wrote:
Here three patches to fix some issues with the new rbd-fuse
code and an issues with
Sage merged these into master. Thanks!
On 01/27/2013 12:57 PM, Danny Al-Gaaf wrote:
Attached two patches to fix some compiler warnings.
Danny Al-Gaaf (2):
utime: fix narrowing conversion compiler warning in sleep()
rbd: don't ignore return value of system()
src/include/utime.h | 2
On 01/29/2013 05:44 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013, Yan, Zheng wrote:
From: Yan, Zheng zheng.z@intel.com
_rename_finish() does not send dentry link/unlink message to replicas.
We should prevent dentries that are modified by the rename operation
from getting new replicas when
On 01/29/2013 10:23 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Yan, Zheng wrote:
On 01/29/2013 05:44 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013, Yan, Zheng wrote:
From: Yan, Zheng zheng.z@intel.com
_rename_finish() does not send dentry link/unlink message to replicas.
We should prevent
Hi,
Please with regards to my questions on Ceph Production Environment ...
I like to give u these details.
i like to test a write, read and delete operation on ceph storage
cluster in a production environment.
i also like to check the self healing and managing functionalities.
i like to know
You could look at the wip-wireshark-zafman branch. I rebased it and force
pushed it. It has changes to the wireshark.patch and a minor change I needed
to get it to build. I'm surprised the recent checkin didn't include the change
to packet-ceph.c which I needed to get it to build.
David
There's a fun potential problem with CEPH_MDS_OP_LOOKUPSNAP handling
in ceph_fill_trace(). Consider the following scenario:
Process calls stat(2). Lookup locks parent, allocates dentry and calls
-lookup(). Request is created and sent over the wire. Then we sit and
wait for completion.
Hi Al,
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Al Viro wrote:
There's a fun potential problem with CEPH_MDS_OP_LOOKUPSNAP handling
in ceph_fill_trace(). Consider the following scenario:
Process calls stat(2). Lookup locks parent, allocates dentry and calls
-lookup(). Request is created and sent over
27 matches
Mail list logo
