Does "ceph df" use "bogus" copies factor instead of (k, m) for erasure coded pool?

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

 



For e. g., an EC pool with default profile (2, 1) has bogus "sizing"
params (size=3, min_size=3).
Min. size 3 is wrong as far as I know and it's been fixed in fresh
releases (but not in Luminous).

But besides that it looks like pool usage isn't calculated according
to EC overhead but as if it was replicated pool with size=3 as well.

-- 
End of message. Next message?
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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