A Jewel in the rough? (cache tier bugs and documentation omissions)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:28 AM, Christian Balzer <chibi at gol.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> It's now 10 months after this thread:
>
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/ceph-users/msg27497.html (plus next message)
>
> and we're at the fifth iteration of Jewel and still
>
> osd_tier_promote_max_objects_sec
> and
> osd_tier_promote_max_bytes_sec
>
> are neither documented (master or jewel), nor mentioned in the changelogs
> and most importantly STILL default to the broken reverse settings above.

Is there a pull request?

John

> Anybody coming from Hammer or even starting with Jewel and using cache
> tiering will be having a VERY bad experience.
>
> Christian
> --
> Christian Balzer        Network/Systems Engineer
> chibi at gol.com           Global OnLine Japan/Rakuten Communications
> http://www.gol.com/
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> ceph-users at lists.ceph.com
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com


[Index of Archives]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Ceph Development]     [Ceph Large]     [Ceph Dev]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux