> On Mar 11, 2020, at 5:28 PM, Anthony D'Atri <anthony.datri@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Custom cluster names are being incrementally deprecated. With ceph-deploy I thought they were removed in 1.39. Maybe the man page is not up-to-date. The command does not accept `—cluster` as an option. > You could probably achieve parallel clusters with containerized daemons if you tried hard enough, but I have to ask what leads you to want to do this. Yes, that’s an interesting thought. I noticed on Octopus man pages today that container support is coming and the repos already have containers with full version history for Nautilus. Use case is a deployment with limited connectivity between one of three nodes (~350Kbps / 5ms RT). I’m currently running production with a single node monitor, but am trying to get to a point where all three nodes have monitors. The limited connectivity node would *only* have a monitor, no OSDs, MDS, etc. This is all possible with a single cluster, but this limited node also needs storage. Maybe a hybrid solution would be for the limited node to run the monitor as above on bare metal and Rook running for local needs out of containers. I guess another option is to throw in the towel on bare metal storage and go full Rook in both locations _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
 |