Thanks Sage! We will test this and share our observations.. Regards, Amit Amit Vijairania | 415.610.9908 --*-- On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Sage Weil <sweil at redhat.com> wrote: > Hi Amit, > > On Mon, 15 Sep 2014, Amit Vijairania wrote: >> Hello! >> >> In a two (2) rack Ceph cluster, with 15 hosts per rack (10 OSD per >> host / 150 OSDs per rack), is it possible to create a ruleset for a >> pool such that the Primary and Secondary PGs/replicas are placed in >> one rack and Tertiary PG/replica is placed in the other rack? >> >> root standard { >> id -1 # do not change unnecessarily >> # weight 734.400 >> alg straw >> hash 0 # rjenkins1 >> item rack1 weight 367.200 >> item rack2 weight 367.200 >> } >> >> Given there are only two (2) buckets, but three (3) replica, is it >> even possible? > > Yes: > > rule myrule { > ruleset 1 > type replicated > min_size 1 > max_size 10 > step take default > step choose firstn 2 type rack > step chooseleaf firstn 2 type host > step emit > } > > That will give you 4 osds, spread across 2 hosts in each rack. The pool > size (replication factor) is 3, so RADOS will just use the first three (2 > hosts in first rack, 1 host in second rack). > > sage > > > > >> I think following Giant blueprint is trying to address scenario I >> described above.. Is the following blueprint targeted for Giant >> release? >> http://wiki.ceph.com/Planning/Blueprints/Giant/crush_extension_for_more_flexible_object_placement >> >> >> Regards, >> Amit Vijairania | Cisco Systems, Inc. >> --*-- >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in >> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> >>