Re: About erasure code for larger hdd

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

 



I'd start with 3+2, so you have one node left for recovery in case one
fails. 6-node and 90 hdd per node sounds like a long recovery that needs to
be tested for sure.

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 at 06:10, Phong Tran Thanh <tranphong079@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> Hi community,
>
> Please help with advice on selecting an erasure coding algorithm for a
> 6-node cluster with 540 OSDs. What would be the appropriate values for *k*
> and *m*? The cluster requires a high level of HA and consistent
> throughput.
>
> Email: tranphong079@xxxxxxxxx
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
>


-- 
Łukasz Borek
lukasz@xxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
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