node1: 4[TB], node2: 4[TB], node3: 4[TB] :) 22 ???. 2014 ?. 12:53 ???????????? "idzzy" <idezebi at gmail.com> ???????: > Hi Irek, > > Understood. > > Let me ask about only this. > > > No, it's for the entire cluster. > > Is this meant that total disk amount size of all nodes is over than 11.8 > TB? > e.g node1: 4[TB], node2: 4[TB], node3: 4[TB] > > not each node. > e.g node1: 11.8[TB], node2: 11.8[TB], node3:11.8 [TB] > > Thank you. > > > On August 22, 2014 at 5:06:02 PM, Irek Fasikhov (malmyzh at gmail.com) wrote: > > I recommend you use replication, because radosgw uses asynchronous > replication. > > Yes divided by nearfull ratio. > No, it's for the entire cluster. > > > 2014-08-22 11:51 GMT+04:00 idzzy <idezebi at gmail.com>: > >> Hi, >> >> If not use replication, Is it only to divide by nearfull_ratio? >> (does only radosgw support replication?) >> >> 10T/0.85 = 11.8 TB of each node? >> >> # ceph pg dump | egrep "full_ratio|nearfulll_ratio" >> full_ratio 0.95 >> nearfull_ratio 0.85 >> >> Sorry I?m not familiar with ceph architecture. >> Thanks for the reply. >> >> ? >> idzzy >> >> On August 22, 2014 at 3:53:21 PM, Irek Fasikhov (malmyzh at gmail.com) >> wrote: >> >> Hi. >> >> 10?B*2/0.85 ~= 24 TB with two replications, total volume for the raw data. >> >> >> >> > > > -- > ? ?????????, ??????? ???? ??????????? > ???.: +79229045757 > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/attachments/20140822/9632dbff/attachment.htm>
 |