Buffer alignment

Hi Andreas, In Ceph, buffers can be aligned if required using buffer::create_page_aligned https://github.com/ceph/ceph/blob/master/src/common/buffer.cc#L519 https://github.com/ceph/ceph/blob/master/src/common/buffer.cc#L230 and although the Jerasure plugin has alignment requirements

Re: CEPH Erasure Encoding + OSD Scalability

Maybe using http://google-perftools.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/doc/cpuprofile.html is enough. fsbench looks overkill indeed. /me exploring options ;-) On 09/12/2013 17:45, Loic Dachary wrote: Hi, Mark Nelson suggested we use perf ( linux-tools ) for benchmarking. It looks like something

RE: are there plans to move to a newer google perftools?

We repackaged dumpling using libgoogle-perftools4 and it does work, and does cohabitate with mongo. -Original Message- From: ceph-devel-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:ceph-devel- ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Don Talton (dotalton) Sent: Monday, December 09, 2013 6:53 PM To:

calamari roadmap?

Is there a roadmap for feature integration into Calamari? Donald Talton Systems Development Unit dotal...@cisco.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe ceph-devel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at

question for the new ceph-osd key/value backend

Sage, I have some questions regarding to the key/value backend work. What is the motivation to work on this? (or what is the problem we want to solve?) 1) to use the new interface thus we can bypass all the OS layer thus get a short latency? 2) or to leverage some new primitive e.g. the atomic

[PATCH] fs: ceph: new helper: file_inode(file)

Signed-off-by: Libo Chen clbchenlibo.c...@huawei.com --- fs/ceph/file.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/ceph/file.c b/fs/ceph/file.c index 3de8982..7549bd6 100644 --- a/fs/ceph/file.c +++ b/fs/ceph/file.c @@ -1018,7 +1018,7 @@ static long

Re: [PATCH] fs: ceph: new helper: file_inode(file)

Applied, thanks! On Wed, 11 Dec 2013, Libo Chen wrote: Signed-off-by: Libo Chen clbchenlibo.c...@huawei.com --- fs/ceph/file.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/ceph/file.c b/fs/ceph/file.c index 3de8982..7549bd6 100644 --- a/fs/ceph/file.c +++

Re: question for the new ceph-osd key/value backend

Hi Jiangang, On Wed, 11 Dec 2013, Duan, Jiangang wrote: Sage, I have some questions regarding to the key/value backend work. What is the motivation to work on this? (or what is the problem we want to solve?) 1) to use the new interface thus we can bypass all the OS layer thus get a

RE: question for the new ceph-osd key/value backend

Thanks. I in general think to find one implementation suitable for all usage models (small vs. big, cold vs. hot) is very difficult. So I like the idea of a backend that lets you plug in a next-gen backend beneath it - - K/V may be a good way to handle many small objects than XFS - however I

Re: question for the new ceph-osd key/value backend

On 11/12/13 19:09, Sage Weil wrote: That is one part. The current strategy of layering on top of a file system and using a write-ahead journal makes sense given the existing linux fs building blocks, but is far from an optimal solution for many workloads. A k/v interface based on something

XFS preallocation with lot of small objects

Hello, Due to lot of reports of ENOSPC for xfs-based stores may be it worth to introduce an option to, say, ceph-deploy which will pass allocsize= param to the mount effectively disabling Dynamic Preallocation? Of course not every case really worth it because of related performance impact. If