Hello, On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:12:30 +0200 (CEST) Daniel Delin wrote: > > >Note that 0.94.6 has a massive, data destroying cache-tier bug, so you > >will want to wait until .7 at least if you're using cache-tiering, or > >read up on the work-around for that bug alternatively. > > This sounds interesting, is there a bug number for this ? Read the "data corruption with hammer" thread. That thread also contains the work-around. http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/12814 Supposedly this isn't present in Jewel (but then again, I'm betting real money on other easter eggs being present in there). > Been playing > around with cache tiering in 0.94.6 and have run in to some issues, not > seen any data destruction yet, but I had problems disconnecting the > cache tier from the backing pool. Also discussed here recently/frequently. See the "Can not disable rbd cache" thread. http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14865 >Luckily just a test pool so I can just > destroy both tier and backing pool, but I would really like to get cache > tiering going on my production pool, it gave a nice performance boost > when I tested it. > It can work quite well, depending on your work load (cache size vs. really hot objects) and the cache mode chosen. I certainly solved my overload cluster problems described in the thread "Reducing the impact of OSD restarts (noout ain't uptosnuff)" with a cache tier. Christian -- Christian Balzer Network/Systems Engineer chibi@xxxxxxx Global OnLine Japan/Rakuten Communications http://www.gol.com/ _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |