Re: [ceph-users] v11.1.0 kraken candidate released

2017-02-16 Thread Dietmar Rieder
On 02/16/2017 09:47 AM, John Spray wrote: > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 8:37 AM, Dietmar Rieder > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 12/13/2016 12:35 PM, John Spray wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Dietmar Rieder >>> wrote: Hi,

Re: [ceph-users] v11.1.0 kraken candidate released

2017-02-16 Thread John Spray
On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 8:37 AM, Dietmar Rieder wrote: > Hi, > > On 12/13/2016 12:35 PM, John Spray wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Dietmar Rieder >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> this is good news! Thanks. >>> >>> As far as I see the

Re: [ceph-users] v11.1.0 kraken candidate released

2017-02-16 Thread Dietmar Rieder
Hi, On 12/13/2016 12:35 PM, John Spray wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Dietmar Rieder > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> this is good news! Thanks. >> >> As far as I see the RBD supports (experimentally) now EC data pools. Is >> this true also for CephFS? It is not

Re: [ceph-users] v11.1.0 kraken candidate released

2016-12-13 Thread Darrell Enns
OK, thanks for the update Greg! - Darrell ___ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Re: [ceph-users] v11.1.0 kraken candidate released

2016-12-13 Thread Gregory Farnum
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 4:34 PM, Darrell Enns wrote: > Are CephFS snapshots still considered unstable/experimental in Kraken? Sadly, yes. I had a solution but they didn't account for hard links. When we decided we wanted to support those instead of ignoring them or trying

Re: [ceph-users] v11.1.0 kraken candidate released

2016-12-13 Thread Darrell Enns
Are CephFS snapshots still considered unstable/experimental in Kraken? ___ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Re: [ceph-users] v11.1.0 kraken candidate released

2016-12-13 Thread John Spray
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Dietmar Rieder wrote: > Hi John, > > Thanks for your answer. > The mentioned modification of the pool validation would than allow for > CephFS having the data pools on EC while keeping the metadata on a > replicated pool, right? I

Re: [ceph-users] v11.1.0 kraken candidate released

2016-12-13 Thread Dietmar Rieder
Hi John, Thanks for your answer. The mentioned modification of the pool validation would than allow for CephFS having the data pools on EC while keeping the metadata on a replicated pool, right? Dietmar On 12/13/2016 12:35 PM, John Spray wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Dietmar Rieder

Re: [ceph-users] v11.1.0 kraken candidate released

2016-12-13 Thread John Spray
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Dietmar Rieder wrote: > Hi, > > this is good news! Thanks. > > As far as I see the RBD supports (experimentally) now EC data pools. Is > this true also for CephFS? It is not stated in the announce, so I wonder > if and when EC pools are

Re: [ceph-users] v11.1.0 kraken candidate released

2016-12-12 Thread Dietmar Rieder
Hi, this is good news! Thanks. As far as I see the RBD supports (experimentally) now EC data pools. Is this true also for CephFS? It is not stated in the announce, so I wonder if and when EC pools are planned to be supported by CephFS. ~regards Dietmar On 12/13/2016 03:28 AM, Abhishek L

Re: [ceph-users] v11.1.0 kraken candidate released

2016-12-12 Thread Ben Hines
It looks like the second releasenote in that section answers my question. sortbitwise is only supported in jewel, and it's required to be already set for Kraken upgraded OSDs to even start up, so one must go to Jewel first. The section heading should probably say just "Upgrading to Kraken"

Re: [ceph-users] v11.1.0 kraken candidate released

2016-12-12 Thread Ben Hines
Hi! Can you clarify whether this release note applies to Jewel upgrades only? Ie, can we go Infernalis -> Kraken? It is in the 'upgrading from jewel' section which would imply that it doesn't apply to Infernalis -> Kraken. (or any other version to kraken), but it does say 'All clusters'.