Okay, Sam thinks he knows what's going on; here's a ticket: http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/12000 On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Gregory Farnum <greg@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 1:07 AM, Paweł Sadowski <ceph@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> I'm testing erasure coded pools. Is there any protection from bit-rot >> errors on object read? If I modify one bit in object part (directly on >> OSD) I'm getting *broken*object: > > Sorry, are you saying that you're getting a broken object if you flip > a bit in an EC pool? That should detect the chunk as invalid and > reconstruct on read... > -Greg > >> >> mon-01:~ # rados --pool ecpool get `hostname -f`_16 - | md5sum >> bb2d82bbb95be6b9a039d135cc7a5d0d - >> >> # modify one bit directly on OSD >> >> mon-01:~ # rados --pool ecpool get `hostname -f`_16 - | md5sum >> 02f04f590010b4b0e6af4741c4097b4f - >> >> # restore bit to original value >> >> mon-01:~ # rados --pool ecpool get `hostname -f`_16 - | md5sum >> bb2d82bbb95be6b9a039d135cc7a5d0d - >> >> If I run deep-scrub on modified bit I'm getting inconsistent PG which is >> correct in this case. After restoring bit and running deep-scrub again >> all PGs are clean. >> >> >> [ceph version 0.94.1 (e4bfad3a3c51054df7e537a724c8d0bf9be972ff)] >> >> >> -- >> PS >> _______________________________________________ >> ceph-users mailing list >> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |