Hello, On Tue, 30 Dec 2014 08:12:21 +1000 Lindsay Mathieson wrote: > On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 11:12:06 PM Christian Balzer wrote: > > Is that a private cluster network just between Ceph storage nodes or is > > this for all ceph traffic (including clients)? > > The later would probably be better, a private cluster network twice as > > fast as the client one isn't particular helpful 99% of the time. > > > The later - all ceph traffic including clients (qemu rbd). > Very good. ^.^ > > > 3rd Node > > > > > > - Monitor only, for quorum > > > > > > - Intel Nuc > > > - 8GB RAM > > > - CPU: Celeron N2820 > > > > Uh oh, a bit weak for a monitor. Where does the OS live (on this and > > the other nodes)? The leveldb (/var/lib/ceph/..) of the monitors likes > > it fast, SSDs preferably. > > On a SSD (all the nodes have OS on SSD). > Good. > Looks like I misunderstood the purpose of the monitors, I presumed they > were just for monitoring node health. They do more than that? > They keep the maps and the pgmap in particular is of course very busy. All that action is at: /var/lib/ceph/mon/<monitorname>/store.db/ . In addition monitors log like no tomorrow, also straining the OS storage. > > > The closer it is to the current storage nodes, the better. > > The slowest OSD in a cluster can impede all (most of) the others. > > Closer as in similar hardware specs? > Ayup. The less variation, the better and the more predictable things become. Again, having 1 node slow down 2 fast nodes is not what you want. Christian -- Christian Balzer Network/Systems Engineer chibi@xxxxxxx Global OnLine Japan/Fusion Communications http://www.gol.com/ _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |