Does anyone have a known-good set of parameters for ext4? I want to try it as well but I’m a bit worried what happnes if I get it wrong. Thanks Jan > On 02 Jul 2015, at 09:40, Nick Fisk <nick@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of >> Christian Balzer >> Sent: 02 July 2015 02:23 >> To: Ceph Users >> Subject: Re: xattrs vs omap >> >> On Thu, 2 Jul 2015 00:36:18 +0000 Somnath Roy wrote: >> >>> It is replaced with the following config option.. >>> >>> // Use omap for xattrs for attrs over >>> // filestore_max_inline_xattr_size or >>> OPTION(filestore_max_inline_xattr_size, OPT_U32, 0) //Override >>> OPTION(filestore_max_inline_xattr_size_xfs, OPT_U32, 65536) >>> OPTION(filestore_max_inline_xattr_size_btrfs, OPT_U32, 2048) >>> OPTION(filestore_max_inline_xattr_size_other, OPT_U32, 512) >>> >>> // for more than filestore_max_inline_xattrs attrs >>> OPTION(filestore_max_inline_xattrs, OPT_U32, 0) //Override >>> OPTION(filestore_max_inline_xattrs_xfs, OPT_U32, 10) >>> OPTION(filestore_max_inline_xattrs_btrfs, OPT_U32, 10) >>> OPTION(filestore_max_inline_xattrs_other, OPT_U32, 2) >>> >>> >>> If these limits crossed, xattrs will be stored in omap.. >>> >> Sounds fair. >> >> Since I only use RBD I don't think it will ever exceed this. > > Possibly, see my thread about performance difference between new and old > pools. Still not quite sure what's going on, but for some reasons some of > the objects behind RBD's have larger xattrs which is causing really poor > performance. > >> >> Thanks, >> >> Chibi >>> For ext4, you can use either filestore_max*_other or >>> filestore_max_inline_xattrs/ filestore_max_inline_xattr_size. I any >>> case, later two will override everything. >>> >>> Thanks & Regards >>> Somnath >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Christian Balzer [mailto:chibi@xxxxxxx] >>> Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2015 5:26 PM >>> To: Ceph Users >>> Cc: Somnath Roy >>> Subject: Re: xattrs vs omap >>> >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> On Wed, 1 Jul 2015 15:24:13 +0000 Somnath Roy wrote: >>> >>>> It doesn't matter, I think filestore_xattr_use_omap is a 'noop' and >>>> not used in the Hammer. >>>> >>> Then what was this functionality replaced with, esp. considering EXT4 >>> based OSDs? >>> >>> Chibi >>>> Thanks & Regards >>>> Somnath >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On >>>> Behalf Of Adam Tygart Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2015 8:20 AM >>>> To: Ceph Users >>>> Subject: xattrs vs omap >>>> >>>> Hello all, >>>> >>>> I've got a coworker who put "filestore_xattr_use_omap = true" in the >>>> ceph.conf when we first started building the cluster. Now he can't >>>> remember why. He thinks it may be a holdover from our first Ceph >>>> cluster (running dumpling on ext4, iirc). >>>> >>>> In the newly built cluster, we are using XFS with 2048 byte inodes, >>>> running Ceph 0.94.2. It currently has production data in it. >>>> >>>> From my reading of other threads, it looks like this is probably not >>>> something you want set to true (at least on XFS), due to performance >>>> implications. Is this something you can change on a running cluster? >>>> Is it worth the hassle? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Adam >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> ceph-users mailing list >>>> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> >>>> PLEASE NOTE: The information contained in this electronic mail >>>> message is intended only for the use of the designated recipient(s) >>>> named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended >>>> recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this >>>> message in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, >>>> or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have >>>> received this communication in error, please notify the sender by >>>> telephone or e-mail (as shown above) immediately and destroy any and >>>> all copies of this message in your possession (whether hard copies >>>> or electronically stored copies). >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> ceph-users mailing list >>>> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Christian Balzer Network/Systems Engineer >>> chibi@xxxxxxx Global OnLine Japan/Fusion Communications >>> http://www.gol.com/ >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> >>> PLEASE NOTE: The information contained in this electronic mail message >>> is intended only for the use of the designated recipient(s) named above. >>> If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are >>> hereby notified that you have received this message in error and that >>> any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is >>> strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, >>> please notify the sender by telephone or e-mail (as shown above) >>> immediately and destroy any and all copies of this message in your >>> possession (whether hard copies or electronically stored copies). >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> 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 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
 |