On 2/19/19 6:28 PM, Marc Roos wrote: > > >> > > > >I'm not saying CephFS snapshots are 100% stable, but for certain > >use-cases they can be. > > > >Try to avoid: > > > >- Multiple CephFS in same cluster > >- Snapshot the root (/) > >- Having a lot of snapshots > > How many is a lot? Having a lot of snapshots in total? Or having a lot > of snapshots on one dir? I was thinking of applying 7 snapshots on 1500 > directories. > Ah, yes, good question. I don't know if there is a true upper limit, but leaving old snapshot around could hurt you when replaying journals and such. Therefor, if you create a snapshot, rsync and then remove it, it should be fine. You were thinking about 1500*7 snapshots? Wido > >Then you could use the cephfs recursive statistics to figure out which > >directories have changed and sync their data to another cluster. > > > >But there are some caveats, but it can work though! > > > >Wido > > > >> > >> > >> To be more precise, Id like to be able to replicate data in a > >> scheduled, atomic way to another cluster, so if the site hosting our > >> primary bitbucket cluster becomes unavailable for some reason, Im > able > >> to spin up another bitbucket cluster elsewhere. > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |