Re: Running on disks that lose their head

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

 



>> Once I know a drive has had a head failure, do I trust that the rest of the drive isn't going to go at an inconvenient moment vs just fixing it right now when it's not 3AM on Christmas morning? (true story)  As good as Ceph is, do I trust that Ceph is smart enough to prevent spreading corrupt data all over the cluster if I leave bad disks in place and they start doing terrible things to the data?

I have a lot more disks than I have trust in disks. If a drive lost a
head then I want it gone.

I love the idea of using smart data but can foresee see some
implementation issues. We have seen some raid configurations where
polling smart will halt all raid operations momentarily. Also, some
controllers require you to use their CLI tool to pool for smart vs
smartmontools.

It would be similarly awesome to embed something like an apdex score
against each osd, especially if it factored in hierarchy to identify
poor performing osds, nodes, racks, etc..

-- 

Kyle
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com




[Index of Archives]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Ceph Development]     [Ceph Large]     [Ceph Dev]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux