Re: MDS and stretched clusters

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

 



On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 12:54 PM Sake Ceph <ceph@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> We're looking for the multiple mds daemons to be active in zone A and
> standby(-replay) in zone B.
> This scenario would also benefit people who have more powerfull hardware
> in zone A than zone B.
>
> Kind regards,
> Sake
>
> > Op 31-10-2024 15:50 CET schreef Adam King <adking@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> >
> >
> > Just noticed this thread. A couple questions. Is what we want to have MDS
> > daemons in say zone A and zone B, but the ones in zone A are prioritized
> to
> > be active and ones in zone B remain as standby unless absolutely
> necessary
> > (all the ones in zone A are down) or is it that we want to have some
> subset
> > of a pool of hosts in zone A and zone B have mds daemons? If it's the
> > former, cephadm doesn't do it. The followup question in that case would
> be
> > if there is some way to tell the mds daemons to prioritize certain ones
> to
> > be active over others? If there is, I didn't know about it, but I assume
> > we'd need that functionality to get that case to work.
>

 You used to be able to do something like this in Ceph with the
standby_for_[name|rank] params, but it looks like that got removed a while
ago. Patrick, is there a new way to make this happen with the mds_join_fs
paradigm?
-Greg
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx




[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