Errr is this very wise ?
I have both its Ethernets connected to the same LAN,
with different IPs in the same subnet
(like, 192.168.200.230/24 and 192.168.200.231/24)
In my experience setting up to interfaces on the same subnet means that
your ssystem doesnt know which one
Hi,
I keep getting inconsistent placement groups and every time its the
whiteout.
cluster [ERR] 9.f repair stat mismatch, got 1563/1563 objects, 0/0 clones,
1551/1551 dirty, 78/78 omap, 0/0 pinned, 12/12 hit_set_archive, 0/-9
whiteouts, 28802382/28802382 bytes, 16107/16107 hit_set_archive
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 6:41 PM, shrey chauhan
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I keep getting inconsistent placement groups and every time its the
> whiteout.
>
>
> cluster [ERR] 9.f repair stat mismatch, got 1563/1563 objects, 0/0 clones,
> 1551/1551 dirty, 78/78 omap, 0/0 pinned, 12/12 hit_set_archive, 0/-9
>
Hi ,
I have created a ceph cluster on centos 7 Servers and it is working fine
with tcp and able to run all benchmarks.
Now want to check the same with rdma and I followed the below link to
deploy the same
https://community.mellanox.com/docs/DOC-2721
After following the above document
Dear all,
I am experimenting with Ceph setup. I set up a single node
(Asus P10S-M WS, Xeon E3-1235 v5, 64 GB RAM, 8x3TB SATA HDDs,
Ubuntu 18.04 Bionic, Ceph packages from
http://download.ceph.com/debian-luminous/dists/xenial/
and iscsi parts built
It is worth asking - why do you want to have two interfaces?
If you have 1Gbps interfaces and this is a bandwidth requirement then
10Gbps cards and switches are very cheap these days.
On 1 June 2018 at 10:37, Panayiotis Gotsis wrote:
> Hello
>
> Bonding and iscsi are not a best practice
Indeed, you have to add routes and rules to routing table. Just bond
them.
-Original Message-
From: John Hearns [mailto:hear...@googlemail.com]
Sent: vrijdag 1 juni 2018 10:00
To: ceph-users
Subject: Re: [ceph-users] iSCSI to a Ceph node with 2 network adapters -
how to ?
Errr
Hello
Bonding and iscsi are not a best practice architecture. Multipath is,
however I can attest to problems with the multipathd and debian.
In any case, what you should try to do and check is:
1) Use two vlans, one for each ethernet port, with different ip
address space. Your initiators on
You can't have a server with both SSDs and HDDs in this setup because you
can't write a crush rule that is able to pick n distinct servers when also
specifying different device classes.
A crush rule for this looks like this:
step take default class=ssd
step choose firstn 1 type host
emit
step
On 06/01/2018 02:01 AM, Wladimir Mutel wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I am experimenting with Ceph setup. I set up a single node
> (Asus P10S-M WS, Xeon E3-1235 v5, 64 GB RAM, 8x3TB SATA HDDs,
> Ubuntu 18.04 Bionic, Ceph packages from
>
Bryan Henderson 于 2018年6月2日周六 10:23写道：
> >Luckily; it's not. I don't remember if the MDS maps contain entirely
> >ephemeral data, but on the scale of cephfs recovery scenarios that's just
> >about the easiest one. Somebody would have to walk through it; you
> probably
> >need to look up the
>Luckily; it's not. I don't remember if the MDS maps contain entirely
>ephemeral data, but on the scale of cephfs recovery scenarios that's just
>about the easiest one. Somebody would have to walk through it; you probably
>need to look up the table states and mds counts from the RADOS store and
Hey Cephers,
This is just a friendly reminder that the next Ceph Developer Monthly
meeting is coming up:
http://wiki.ceph.com/Planning
If you have work that you're doing that it a feature work, significant
backports, or anything you would like to discuss with the core team,
please add it to
The (1) TPG per gateway is expected behavior since that is how ALUA
active/passive is configured.
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 1:20 PM, Wladimir Mutel wrote:
> Ok, I looked into Python sources of ceph-iscsi-{cli,config} and
> found that per-host configuration sections use short host
Hi,
Some of our community members reported problems while sending email to
mailings hosted by Ceph project.
We reported the problem to the host company and it's happening because
some changes on DNS records done some time ago, and they're working to
fix it.
The issue happens to all mailings
CephFS snapshot is now stable and enabled by default on new filesystems
:)
Alexandre Derumier
Ingénieur système et stockage
Manager Infrastructure
Fixe : +33 3 59 82 20 10
125 Avenue de la république
59110 La Madeleine
[ https://twitter.com/OdisoHosting ] [
-- Forwarded message --
From: Brad Hubbard
Date: Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 9:24 PM
Subject: Re: [ceph-users] inconsistent pgs :- stat mismatch in whiteouts
To: shrey chauhan
Cc: ceph-users
Too late for me today.
If you send your reply to the list someone else may provide an answer
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 10:33 PM, Marc Roos wrote:
>
> I actually tried to search the ML before bringing up this topic. Because
> I do not get the logic choosing this direction.
>
> - Bluestore is created to cut out some fs overhead,
> - everywhere 10Gb is recommended because of better latency.
Well, ok, I moved second address into different subnet
(192.168.201.231/24) and also reflected that in 'hosts' file
But that did not help much :
/iscsi-target...test/gateways> create p10s2 192.168.201.231 skipchecks=true
OS version/package checks have been bypassed
Adding gateway,
FYI
De: "Abhishek" À: "ceph-devel"
, "ceph-users" ,
ceph-maintain...@ceph.com, ceph-annou...@ceph.com Envoyé: Vendredi 1
Juin 2018 14:11:00 Objet: v13.2.0 Mimic is out
We're glad to announce the first stable release of Mimic, the next long
term release series. There have been major changes
Are your firewall ports open for rbd-target-api? Is the process
running on the other host? If you run "gwcli -d" and try to add the
second gateway, what messages do you see?
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 8:15 AM, Wladimir Mutel wrote:
> Well, ok, I moved second address into different subnet
>
Hi Greg,
Firstly, many thanks for your advice.
I'm perplexed as to why the crush map is upset; the host names look the
same, each node has a fixed IP on a single bond0 interface.
Perhaps the problems were an artefact of having "nodown" set?
As you suggested, I've unset "osd nodown" and am
yes it is cache, moreover what are these whiteouts? and when does this
mismatch occur.
Thanks
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 3:51 PM, Brad Hubbard wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 6:41 PM, shrey chauhan
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I keep getting inconsistent placement groups and every time its the
> >
Hi All,
I looking at starting to move my deployed ceph cluster to SSD.
As a first step my though is to get a large enough set of SSD
expantion that I can set crush map to ensure 1 copy of every
(important) PG is on SSD and use primary affinity to ensure that copy
is primary.
I know this won't
Yes it is indeed difficult to find a good balance between asking
multiple things in one email and risk that not all are answered, or
putting them as individual questions.
-Original Message-
From: David Turner [mailto:drakonst...@gmail.com]
Sent: donderdag 31 mei 2018 23:50
To: Marc
Thanks for the input, both. I've gone ahead with the SM863As. I've no
input on the Microns I'm afraid. The specs look good to me, I just can't
get them easily.
Sean, I didn't know you'd lost 10 in all. I do have 4x 480GB S4600s I'm
using as Filestore journals in production for a couple of
Thanks to those who have added their config, Request anyone in list
using EC profile in production to add high level config which will be
helpful for tests.
Thanks
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Vasu Kulkarni wrote:
> Hello Ceph Users,
>
> I would like to know how folks are using EC profile
Ok, I looked into Python sources of ceph-iscsi-{cli,config} and
found that per-host configuration sections use short host name
(returned by this_host() function) as their primary key.
So I can't trick gwcli with alternative host name like p10s2
which I put
28 matches
Mail list logo
