Hello, On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 07:02:13 +0200 Michael Metz-Martini | SpeedPartner GmbH wrote: > Hi, > > Am 15.04.2016 um 03:07 schrieb Christian Balzer: > >> We thought this was a good idea so that we can change the replication > >> size different for doc_root and raw-data if we like. Seems this was a > >> bad idea for all objects. > > I'm not sure how you managed to get into that state or if it's a bug > > after all, but I can't replicate it on the latest hammer. > > Firstly I created a "default" FS, with the classic metadata and data > > pools, mounted it and put some files into the root. > > Then I added a second pool (filegoats) and set the layout for a > > subdirectory to use it. After re-mounting the FS and copying data to > > that subdir I get this, exactly what one would expect: > > --- > > > > NAME ID USED %USED MAX AVAIL OBJECTS > > data 0 82043k 0 1181G 334 > > metadata 1 2845k 0 1181G 20 > > rbd 2 161G 2.84 787G 41914 > > filegoats 10 89034k 0 1181G 336 > > --- > > So no duplicate objects (or at least their headers) for me. > > > > If nobody else has anything to say about this, I'd consider filing a > > bug report. > Im must admit that we're currently using 0.87 (Giant) and haven't > upgraded so far. Would be nice to know if upgrade would "clean" this > state or we should better start with a new cluster ... :( > I can't really comment on that, but you will probably want to wait for Jewel, being a LTS release and having plenty of CephFS enhancements including a fsck. Have you verified what those objects in your data pool are? And that they are actually there on disk? If so, I'd expect them all to be zero length. 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
 |