Perhaps here: http://ceph.com/releases/v0-80-firefly-released/ Thanks On 14 July 2014 18:18, Sage Weil <sweil at redhat.com> wrote: > I've added some additional notes/warnings to the upgrade and release > notes: > > > https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/fc597e5e3473d7db6548405ce347ca7732832451 > > If there is somewhere else where you think a warning flag would be useful, > let me know! > > Generally speaking, we want to be able to cope with huge data rebalances > without interrupting service. It's an ongoing process of improving the > recovery vs client prioritization, though, and removing sources of > overhead related to rebalancing... and it's clearly not perfect yet. :/ > > sage > > > On Sun, 13 Jul 2014, Andrija Panic wrote: > > > Hi, > > after seting ceph upgrade (0.72.2 to 0.80.3) I have issued "ceph osd > crush > > tunables optimal" and after only few minutes I have added 2 more OSDs to > the > > CEPH cluster... > > > > So these 2 changes were more or a less done at the same time - > rebalancing > > because of tunables optimal, and rebalancing because of adding new OSD... > > > > Result - all VMs living on CEPH storage have gone mad, no disk access > > efectively, blocked so to speak. > > > > Since this rebalancing took 5h-6h, I had bunch of VMs down for that > long... > > > > Did I do wrong by causing "2 rebalancing" to happen at the same time ? > > Is this behaviour normal, to cause great load on all VMs because they are > > unable to access CEPH storage efectively ? > > > > Thanks for any input... > > -- > > > > Andrija Pani? > > > > -- Andrija Pani? -------------------------------------- http://admintweets.com -------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/attachments/20140714/fc498d0c/attachment.htm>
 |