Re: Erasure Encoding Chunks > Number of Hosts

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

 



Hi Loic,

That's an interesting idea, I suppose the same could probably be achieved by
just creating more "Crush Host Buckets" for each actual host and then treat
the actual physical host as a chassis (Chassis-1 contains Host-1-A,
Host-1-B...etc)

I was thinking about this some more and I don't think my original idea of
k=6 m=2 will allow me to sustain a host + disk failure as that would involve
3 disk failures in total (assuming 2 failed chunks are on failed host).

I believe k=5 m=3 would be a better match.

Nick

-----Original Message-----
From: Loic Dachary [mailto:loic@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: 05 January 2015 17:38
To: Nick Fisk; ceph-users@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re:  Erasure Encoding Chunks > Number of Hosts

Hi Nick,

What about subdividing your hosts using containers ? For instance four
container per host on your four hosts which gives you 16 hosts. When you add
more hosts you move containers around and reduce the number of containers
per host. But you don't need to change the rulesets.

Cheers

On 05/01/2015 17:58, Nick Fisk wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
>  
> 
> Would anybody have an idea a) If it?s possible and b) if it?s a good idea

> 
> to have more EC chunks than the total number of hosts?
> 
>  
> 
> For instance if I wanted to have a k=6 m=2, but only across 4 hosts and I
wanted to be able to withstand 1 host failure and 1 disk failure(any host),
would a crush map rule be able to achieve that?
> 
>  
> 
> Ie It would first instruct data to be 1^st split evenly across hosts and
then across OSD?s?
> 
>  
> 
> If I set the erasure profile failure domain to OSD and the crushmap to
chooseleaf host, will this effectively achieve what I have described?
> 
>  
> 
> I would be interested in doing this for two reasons, one being for better
increased capacity than k=2 m=2 and the other is that when I expand this
cluster in the near future to 8 hosts I won?t  have to worry about
re-creating the pool. I fully understand I would forfeit the ability to
withstand to lose 2 hosts, but I would think this to be quite an unlikely
event having only 2 hosts to start with.
> 
>  
> 
> Many thanks,
> 
> Nick
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> 

-- 
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre






_______________________________________________
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]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux