Hi All,
First, thanks for your welcome messages and your votes.
Note that the next online meeting is on the 6th June:
https://wiki.ceph.com/Community/Meetings .
Note also the next openstack meetup that will speak about storage and
ceph :
Hello,
On Mon, 2 Jun 2014 16:15:22 +0800 Indra Pramana wrote:
Dear all,
I have managed to identify some slow OSDs and journals and have since
replaced them. RADOS benchmark of the whole cluster is now fast, much
improved from last time, showing the cluster can go up to 700+ MB/s.
=
I'd like to encourage anyone who would like to carry on the
conversation to join us on the new calamari mailing list:
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-calamari-ceph.com
Thanks,
John
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 10:10 AM, John Spray john.sp...@inktank.com wrote:
Tim,
Right now it's purely a
- Message from Guang Yang yguan...@yahoo.com -
Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 08:56:37 +0800
From: Guang Yang yguan...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Expanding pg's of an erasure coded pool
To: Gregory Farnum g...@inktank.com
Cc: Kenneth Waegeman
Hi, Craig,
Many thanks for your reply.
The disk was completely recovered, the filesystem error was caused by
fiber connection broke(cable issue), the disk/RAID itself is health, so,
there is no physical disk error but filesystem corruption in our case.
The file system itself was recovered by
On 06/02/2014 12:41 PM, Felix Lee wrote:
Hi, Craig,
Many thanks for your reply.
The disk was completely recovered, the filesystem error was caused by
fiber connection broke(cable issue), the disk/RAID itself is health, so,
there is no physical disk error but filesystem corruption in our case.
Hi Folks!
For those of you, who are using ceph-dash
(https://github.com/Crapworks/ceph-dash), I've created a Nagios-Plugin,
that uses the json endpoint to monitor your cluster remotely:
* https://github.com/Crapworks/check_ceph_dash
I think this can be easily adopted to use the ceph-rest-api as
Hi, Wido,
Why even try to recover the XFS filesystem?
Well, basically, our intention was to fix D process, and, yes, I have
to admit, at some point, to recover filesystem was kind of reflex action
while suffering storage error, it's a part of standard procedures for
traditional storage system
Hi All,
There is a new bug-fix release of ceph-deploy, the easy deployment tool
for Ceph.
The full list of fixes for this release can be found in the changelog:
http://ceph.com/ceph-deploy/docs/changelog.html#id1
Make sure you update!
-Alfredo
___
Did the python-ceph package go away or something? Upgrading from 0.80.1-0.el6
to 0.80.1-2.el6 does not work.
# yum install ceph python-ceph
Package python-ceph-0.80.1-0.el6.x86_64 already installed and latest version
Resolving Dependencies
-- Running transaction check
--- Package ceph.x86_64
Also the 0.80.1-2.el6 ceph-radosgw RPM no longer includes an init script.
Where is the proper place to report issues with the RPMs?
On 6/2/2014 9:53 AM, Brian Rak wrote:
Did the python-ceph package go away or something? Upgrading from
0.80.1-0.el6 to 0.80.1-2.el6 does not work.
# yum
I found a fun failure mode this weekend.
I have 6 SSDs in my 6-node Ceph cluster at home. The SSDs are partitioned;
about half of the SSD is used for journal space for other OSDs, and half
holds an OSD for a cache tier. I finally turned it on the cache late last
week, and everything was great,
I'm sorry to hear about that.
I'd say don't use btrfs at all, it has proven unstable for us in production
even without cache. It's just not ready for production use.
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Scott Laird sc...@sigkill.org wrote:
I found a fun failure mode this weekend.
I have 6 SSDs
Hi,
In march 2013 Greg wrote an excellent blog posting regarding the (then)
current status of MDS/CephFS and the plans for going forward with
development.
http://ceph.com/dev-notes/cephfs-mds-status-discussion/
Since then, I understand progress has been slow, and Greg confirmed that
he didn't
On 06/02/2014 10:54 AM, Erik Logtenberg wrote:
Hi,
In march 2013 Greg wrote an excellent blog posting regarding the (then)
current status of MDS/CephFS and the plans for going forward with
development.
http://ceph.com/dev-notes/cephfs-mds-status-discussion/
Since then, I understand progress
I can cope with single-FS failures, within reason. It's the coordinated
failures across multiple servers that really freak me out.
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 8:47 AM, Thorwald Lundqvist thorw...@jumpstarter.io
wrote:
I'm sorry to hear about that.
I'd say don't use btrfs at all, it has proven
Hi,
I'm looking for a fast and cheap 10gbe ethernet switch.
I just found this:
Mellanox SX1012
http://www.mellanox.com/page/products_dyn?product_family=163mtag=sx1012
48port 10Gbe | 12ports 46gbit for around 5000€.
Seem that infiniband (roce) is also available.
Does somebody use it for
On Mon, 2 Jun 2014 17:47:57 Thorwald Lundqvist wrote:
I'd say don't use btrfs at all, it has proven unstable for us in production
even without cache. It's just not ready for production use.
Perception of stability depends on experience. For instance some consider XFS
to be ready for production
Oh, and thanks for the filestore btrfs snap = false pointer. In
ceph.conf, under [osd], I assume?
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Scott Laird sc...@sigkill.org wrote:
FWIW, I figured out the ceph out of memory error that was keeping me
from recovering one FS:
# ls -l /mnt
ls: cannot
They're from that link. They were definitely present in the repository
a couple hours ago. Maybe this got reverted?
On 6/2/2014 1:08 PM, Alfredo Deza wrote:
Brian
Where is that ceph repo coming from? I don't see any 0.80.1-2 in
http://ceph.com/rpm-firefly/el6/x86_64/
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014
Oh I see that it is coming from EPEL.
We have not packaged that, not sure why suddenly EPEL is serving those :/
Officially we have not built a 0.80.1-2. A possible workaround for
this would be to up the priority
on the repo file for ceph in /etc/yum/repos.d/ceph.repo but you would
need to
On 06/02/2014 11:24 AM, Mark Nelson wrote:
A more or less obvious alternative for CephFS would be to simply create
a huge RBD and have a separate file server (running NFS / Samba /
whatever) use that block device as backend. Just put a regular FS on top
of the RBD and use it that way.
This is great. Thanks for sharing Filippos!
Best Regards,
Patrick McGarry
Director, Community || Inktank
http://ceph.com || http://inktank.com
@scuttlemonkey || @ceph || @inktank
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Filippos Giannakos philipg...@grnet.gr wrote:
Hello all,
As you may already
Thanks, Filippos! Very interesting reading.
Are you comfortable enough yet to remove the RAID-1 from your architecture and
get all that space back?
Ian R. Colle
Global Director
of Software Engineering
Red Hat (Inktank is now part of Red Hat!)
http://www.linkedin.com/in/ircolle
Yehuda,
sorry for the delay in reply, I was away for a week or so.
The problem happens regardless of the client. I've tried a few.
You are right, I've got a load balancer and a reverse proxy behind the radosgw
service. My setup is as follows:
Internet --- Load Balancer --
I think your proxy or load balancer rewrites the requests, translates
the spaces and other special characters, which in turn clobbers the
authentication signatures. You can try disabling this functionality.
Yehuda
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Andrei Mikhailovsky and...@arhont.com wrote:
Hi, everyone!
I have installed a ceph cluster with object storage.Now I meet a question.
I can use S3 Client or SDK to upload or delete a object, but can't change the
ACL of objects.
When I try to change the ACL, the error info is Failed - InvalidArgument 400
What's the config about this?
Thanks!
Thanks Carlos
How about:
Infiniband - Voltaire 4036 - Dual power 36 QDR port for about $1300 (ebay) -
pay attention to fan module for air flow direction.
I just found this:
http://www.mellanox.com/related-docs/whitepapers/WP_Deploying_Ceph_over_High_Performance_Networks.pdf
Good to see than ceph begin to be tested by hardware vendor :)
Whitepaper include radosbench and fio results
- Mail original -
De: Alexandre DERUMIER
Hi Haomai,
I tried to compare the READ performance of FileStore and KeyValueStore
using the internal tool ceph_smalliobench and I see KeyValueStore's
performance is approx half that of FileStore. I'm using similar conf file
as yours. Is this the expected behavior or am I missing something?
This is the first development release since Firefly. It includes a
lot of work that we delayed merging while stabilizing things. Lots of
new functionality, as well as several fixes that are baking a bit before
getting backported.
Upgrading
-
* CephFS support for the legacy anchor table
31 matches
Mail list logo
