On Thu, 23 Apr 2015, HEWLETT, Paul (Paul)** CTR ** wrote: > What about running multiple clusters on the same host? > > There is a separate mail thread about being able to run clusters with different conf files on the same host. > Will the new systemd service scripts cope with this? As currently planned, no. Unfortunately systemd only allows a single substitution/id for identifying a daemon instance. If we try to use that for both cluster and (osd/mon) id (e.g., ceph-1, mycluster-232) it gets ugly because we can separate them into different fields. The current plan is for the cluster name to be specified in /etc/sysconfig/ceph or similar. I'm hoping anyone who really needs multiple clusters on the same host can accomplish that using containers... would that cover your use case? sage > > Paul Hewlett > Senior Systems Engineer > Velocix, Cambridge > Alcatel-Lucent > t: +44 1223 435893 > > > > ________________________________________ > From: ceph-users [ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] on behalf of Gregory Farnum [greg@xxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: 22 April 2015 23:26 > To: Ken Dreyer > Cc: ceph-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: systemd unit files and multiple daemons > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Ken Dreyer <kdreyer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I could really use some eyes on the systemd change proposed here: > > http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11344 > > > > Specifically, on bullet #4 there, should we have a single > > "ceph-mon.service" (implying that users should only run one monitor > > daemon per server) or if we should support multiple "ceph-mon@" services > > (implying that users will need to specify additional information when > > starting the service(s)). The version in our tree is "ceph-mon@". James' > > work for Ubuntu Vivid is only "ceph-mon" [2]. Same thing for ceph-mds vs > > ceph-mds@. > > > > I'd prefer to keep Ubuntu downstream the same as Ceph upstream. > > > > What do we want to do for this? > > > > How common is it to run multiple monitor daemons or mds daemons on a > > single host? > > For a real deployment, you shouldn't be running multiple monitors on a > single node in the general case. I'm not sure if we want to prohibit > it by policy, but I'd be okay with the idea. > For testing purposes (in ceph-qa-suite or using vstart as a developer) > it's pretty common though, and we probably don't want to have to > rewrite all our tests to change that. I'm not sure that vstart ever > uses the regular init system, but teuthology/ceph-qa-suite obviously > do! > > For MDSes, it's probably appropriate/correct to support multiple > daemons on the same host. This can be either a fault tolerance thing, > or just a way of better using multiple cores if you're living on the > (very dangerous) edge. > -Greg > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list > ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |