On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 02:12:52PM PST, Gregory Farnum spake thusly:
> Hmm, I went digging in and sadly this isn't quite right.
Thanks for looking into this! This is the answer I was afraid of. Aren't
all of those blog entries which talk about using repair and the ceph
docs themselves putting peo
Farnum
Sent: 20 February 2017 22:13
To: Nick Fisk ; David Zafman
Cc: ceph-users
Subject: Re: [ceph-users] How safe is ceph pg repair these days?
On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 12:39 AM, Nick Fisk wrote:
From what I understand in Jewel+ Ceph has the concept of an
authorative shard, so in the case of a
> -Original Message-
> From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com] On Behalf Of
> Gregory Farnum
> Sent: 20 February 2017 22:13
> To: Nick Fisk ; David Zafman
> Cc: ceph-users
> Subject: Re: [ceph-users] How safe is ceph pg repair these days?
>
&
one.
2. Scrubbing (deep) becomes something of "feel good" thing that can be done
in much longer intervals (depending on the quality of your storage and
replication size) and with much lower priority.
As it's main (only?) benefit will be to detect and correct corruption
before a
and
handle more of the use cases that BlueStore is likely to expose and
which FileStore did not. But just about all the scrub/repair
enhancements we're aiming at will work on both systems, and making
them handle the BlueStore cases may do a lot more proportionally for
FileStore.
-Greg
>
>
the main goal and focus is still BlueStore with
live internal checksums that make scrubbing obsolete, right?
Christian
> -Greg
>
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com] On Behalf Of
> >> Tracy Reed
>
in ways that cooperate with RADOS.
-Greg
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com] On Behalf Of
>> Tracy Reed
>> Sent: 18 February 2017 03:06
>> To: Shinobu Kinjo
>> Cc: ceph-users
>> Subject: Re: [ce
ons that would be good as well.
> -Original Message-
> From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com] On Behalf Of
> Tracy Reed
> Sent: 18 February 2017 03:06
> To: Shinobu Kinjo
> Cc: ceph-users
> Subject: Re: [ceph-users] How safe is ceph pg repair thes
Well, that's the question...is that safe? Because the link to the
mailing list post (possibly outdated) says that what you just suggested
is definitely NOT safe. Is the mailing list post wrong? Has the
situation changed? Exactly what does ceph repair do now? I suppose I
could go dig into the code b
if ``ceph pg deep-scrub `` does not work
then
do
``ceph pg repair
On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Tracy Reed wrote:
> I have a 3 replica cluster. A couple times I have run into inconsistent
> PGs. I googled it and ceph docs and various blogs say run a repair
> first. But a couple people
I have a 3 replica cluster. A couple times I have run into inconsistent
PGs. I googled it and ceph docs and various blogs say run a repair
first. But a couple people on IRC and a mailing list thread from 2015
say that ceph blindly copies the primary over the secondaries and calls
it good.
http://
11 matches
Mail list logo
