On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 7:05 AM, Bob Ababurko <bob@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > If I am using a more recent client(kernel OR ceph-fuse), should I still be > worried about the MDS's crashing? I have added RAM to my MDS hosts and its > my understanding this will also help mitigate any issues, in addition to > setting mds_bal_frag = true. Not having used cephfs before, do I always > need to worry about my MDS servers crashing all the time, thus the need for > setting mds_reconnect_timeout to 0? This is not ideal for us nor is the > idea of clients not able to access their mounts after a MDS recovery. > It's unlikely this issue will happen again. But I can't guarantee no other issue. no need to set mds_reconnect_timeout to 0. > I am actually looking for the most stable way to implement cephfs at this > point. My cephfs cluster contains millions of small files, so many inodes > if that needs to be taken into account. Perhaps I should only be using one > MDS node for stability at this point? Is this the best way forward to get a > handle on stability? I'm also curious if I should I set my mds cache size > to a number greater than files I have in the cephfs cluster? If you can > give some key points to configure cephfs to get the best stability and if > possible, availability.....this would be helpful to me. One active MDS is the most stable setup. Adding a few standby MDS should not hurt stability. You can't set mds cache size to a number greater than files in the fs, it requires lots of memory. Yan, Zheng > > thanks again for the help. > > thanks, > Bob > _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |