Re: 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]

 



On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 16:52, Paul Emmerich <paul.emmerich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 11:50 AM Igor Podlesny <ceph-user@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 14:46, Paul Emmerich <paul.emmerich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]
> > Looked at it, didn't see any explanation of your point of view. If
> > there're 2 active data instances
> > (and 3rd is missing) how is it different to replicated pools with 3/2 config(?)
>
> each of these "copies" has only half the data

Still not seeing how come.

EC(2, 1) is conceptually RAID5 on 3 devices. You're basically saying
that if one disk of those 3 disks is missing
you can't safely write to 2 others that are still in. But CEPH's EC
has no partial update issue, has it?

Can you elaborate?

-- 
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]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux