Re: [ceph-users] hammer -> jewel 10.2.8 upgrade and setting sortbitwise

2017-07-18 Thread David Turner
It was recommended to set sort_bitwise in the upgrade from Hammer to Jewel when Jewel was first released. 10.2.6 is definitely safe to enable it. On Tue, Jul 18, 2017, 8:05 AM Dan van der Ster wrote: > Hi Martin, > > We had sortbitwise set on other jewel clusters well

Re: [ceph-users] hammer -> jewel 10.2.8 upgrade and setting sortbitwise

2017-07-18 Thread Dan van der Ster
Hi Martin, We had sortbitwise set on other jewel clusters well before 10.2.9 was out. 10.2.8 added the warning if it is not set, but the flag should be safe in 10.2.6. -- Dan On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Martin Palma wrote: > Can the "sortbitwise" also be set if we have

Re: [ceph-users] hammer -> jewel 10.2.8 upgrade and setting sortbitwise

2017-07-18 Thread Martin Palma
Can the "sortbitwise" also be set if we have a cluster running OSDs on 10.2.6 and some OSDs on 10.2.9? Or should we wait that all OSDs are on 10.2.9? Monitor nodes are already on 10.2.9. Best, Martin On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 1:16 PM, Dan van der Ster wrote: > On Mon, Jul

Re: [ceph-users] hammer -> jewel 10.2.8 upgrade and setting sortbitwise

2017-07-14 Thread Dan van der Ster
On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 5:06 PM, Sage Weil wrote: > On Mon, 10 Jul 2017, Luis Periquito wrote: >> Hi Dan, >> >> I've enabled it in a couple of big-ish clusters and had the same >> experience - a few seconds disruption caused by a peering process >> being triggered, like any

Re: [ceph-users] hammer -> jewel 10.2.8 upgrade and setting sortbitwise

2017-07-10 Thread Sage Weil
On Mon, 10 Jul 2017, Luis Periquito wrote: > Hi Dan, > > I've enabled it in a couple of big-ish clusters and had the same > experience - a few seconds disruption caused by a peering process > being triggered, like any other crushmap update does. Can't remember > if it triggered data movement, but

Re: [ceph-users] hammer -> jewel 10.2.8 upgrade and setting sortbitwise

2017-07-10 Thread Luis Periquito
Hi Dan, I've enabled it in a couple of big-ish clusters and had the same experience - a few seconds disruption caused by a peering process being triggered, like any other crushmap update does. Can't remember if it triggered data movement, but I have a feeling it did... On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at

[ceph-users] hammer -> jewel 10.2.8 upgrade and setting sortbitwise

2017-07-10 Thread Dan van der Ster
Hi all, With 10.2.8, ceph will now warn if you didn't yet set sortbitwise. I just updated a test cluster, saw that warning, then did the necessary ceph osd set sortbitwise I noticed a short re-peering which took around 10s on this small cluster with very little data. Has anyone done this