Re: [ceph-users] Erasure coded pools and 'feature set mismatch' issue

On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Bogdan SOLGA wrote: > Hello Adam! > > Thank you very much for your advice, I will try setting the tunables to > 'firefly'. Won't work. OS Recommendations page clearly states that firefly tunables are supported starting with 3.15. 3.13,

Re: [ceph-users] Erasure coded pools and 'feature set mismatch' issue

Hello Adam! Thank you very much for your advice, I will try setting the tunables to 'firefly'. As there seem to be a few features which would require the 4.1 kernel... is there any 'advised' Linux distribution on which Ceph is known to work best? According to this

Re: [ceph-users] Erasure coded pools and 'feature set mismatch' issue

With that release it shouldn't be the EC pool causing trouble; it's the CRUSH tunables also mentioned in that thread. Instructions should be available in the docs for using older tunable that are compatible with kernel 3.13. -Greg On Saturday, November 7, 2015, Bogdan SOLGA

Re: [ceph-users] Erasure coded pools and 'feature set mismatch' issue

Hello Greg! Thank you for your advice, first of all! I have tried to adjust the Ceph tunables detailed in this page, but without success. I have tried both '*ceph osd crush tunables optimal*' and '*ceph osd crush tunables hammer*',

Re: [ceph-users] Erasure coded pools and 'feature set mismatch' issue

The problem is that "hammer" tunables (i.e. "optimal" in v0.94.x) are incompatible with the kernel interfaces before Linux 4.1 (namely due to straw2 buckets). To make use of the kernel interfaces in 3.13, I believe you'll need "firefly" tunables. -- Adam On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 11:48 PM, Bogdan