> > Many of us deploy ceph as a solution to storage high-availability. > > During the time, I've encountered a couple of moments when ceph refused > to > deliver I/O to VMs even when a tiny part of the PGs were stuck in > non-active states due to challenges on the OSDs. I do not know what you mean by this, you can tune this with your min size and replication. It is hard to believe that exactly harddrives fail in the same pg. I wonder if this is not more related to your 'non-default' config? > So I found myself in very unpleasant situations when an entire cluster > went > down because of 1 single node, even if that cluster was supposed to be > fault-tolerant. That is also very hard to believe, since I am updating ceph and reboot one node at time, which is just going fine. > > Regardless of the reason, the cluster itself can be a single point of > failure, even if it's has a lot of nodes. Indeed, like the data center, and like the planet. The question you should ask yourself, do you have a better alternative? For the 3-4 years I have been using ceph, I did not find a better alternative (also not looking for it ;)) > How do you segment your deployments so that your business doesn't > get jeopardised in the case when your ceph cluster misbehaves? > > Does anyone even use ceph for a very large clusters, or do you prefer to > separate everything into smaller clusters? If you would read and investigate, you would not need to ask this question. Is your lack of knowledge of ceph maybe a critical issue? I know the ceph organization likes to make everything as simple as possible for everyone. But this has of course its flip side when users run into serious issues. _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
 |