Re: Fwd: crush_location hook vs calamari

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 22 Jan 2015, Sage Weil wrote:
> 2) I have some doubts about whether the crush location update via the init 
> script is a good idea.  I have a half-finished patch that move this step 
> into the OSD itself so that the init script doesn't block when the mons 
> are down; instead, ceph-osd will start (and maybe fork) as usual and then 
> retry until the mons become available, do the crush update, and then do 
> the rest of its boot sequence.  We also avoid duplicating the 
> implementation in the sysvinit script and upstart/systemd helper (which 
> IIRC is somewhat awkward to trigger, the original motivation for this 
> patch).

Nevermind, I remember why this didn't get very far.. the OSD works off the 
crush_location option but that still needs to be filled in by the hook, so 
either the init systems needs to do a --crush-location `...` deal (meh) or 
ceph-osd has to call the hook directly (meh).

sage

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [CEPH Users]     [Ceph Large]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux BTRFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux