It was recommended to set sort_bitwise in the upgrade from Hammer to Jewel when Jewel was first released. 10.2.6 is definitely safe to enable it.
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017, 8:05 AM Dan van der Ster <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Martin,
We had sortbitwise set on other jewel clusters well before 10.2.9 was out.
10.2.8 added the warning if it is not set, but the flag should be safe
in 10.2.6.
-- Dan
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Martin Palma <martin@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Can the "sortbitwise" also be set if we have a cluster running OSDs on
> 10.2.6 and some OSDs on 10.2.9? Or should we wait that all OSDs are on
> 10.2.9?
>
> Monitor nodes are already on 10.2.9.
>
> Best,
> Martin
>
> On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 1:16 PM, Dan van der Ster <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 5:06 PM, Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 10 Jul 2017, Luis Periquito wrote:
>>>> Hi Dan,
>>>>
>>>> I've enabled it in a couple of big-ish clusters and had the same
>>>> experience - a few seconds disruption caused by a peering process
>>>> being triggered, like any other crushmap update does. Can't remember
>>>> if it triggered data movement, but I have a feeling it did...
>>>
>>> That's consistent with what one should expect.
>>>
>>> The flag triggers a new peering interval, which means the PGs will peer,
>>> but there is no change in the mapping or data layout or anything else.
>>> The only thing that is potentially scary here is that *every* PG will
>>> repeer at the same time.
>>
>> Thanks Sage & Luis. I confirm that setting sortbitwise on a large
>> cluster is basically a non-event... nothing to worry about.
>>
>> (Btw, we just upgraded our biggest prod clusters to jewel -- that also
>> went totally smooth!)
>>
>> -- Dan
>>
>>> sage
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Dan van der Ster <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> > Hi all,
>>>> >
>>>> > With 10.2.8, ceph will now warn if you didn't yet set sortbitwise.
>>>> >
>>>> > I just updated a test cluster, saw that warning, then did the necessary
>>>> > ceph osd set sortbitwise
>>>> >
>>>> > I noticed a short re-peering which took around 10s on this small
>>>> > cluster with very little data.
>>>> >
>>>> > Has anyone done this already on a large cluster with lots of objects?
>>>> > It would be nice to hear that it isn't disruptive before running it on
>>>> > our big production instances.
>>>> >
>>>> > Cheers, Dan
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > 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
_______________________________________________
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
