Hi, For replicated pools we default to min_size=2 when size=3 (size-size/2) in order to avoid the split brain scenario, for example as described here: http://www.spinics.net/lists/ceph-devel/msg27008.html But for erasure pools we default to min_size=k which I think is a recipe for similar problems. Shouldn't we default to at least min_size=k+1?? diff --git a/src/mon/OSDMonitor.cc b/src/mon/OSDMonitor.cc index 77e26de..5d51686 100644 --- a/src/mon/OSDMonitor.cc +++ b/src/mon/OSDMonitor.cc @@ -4427,7 +4427,7 @@ int OSDMonitor::prepare_pool_size(const unsigned pool_type, err = get_erasure_code(erasure_code_profile, &erasure_code, ss); if (err == 0) { *size = erasure_code->get_chunk_count(); - *min_size = erasure_code->get_data_chunk_count(); + *min_size = erasure_code->get_data_chunk_count() + 1; } } break; Cheers, Dan -- 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
