ram: 768GB cpu: AMD EPYC 9634 84-Core On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 at 15:48, Anthony D'Atri <aad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > It’s difficult to fully answer your question with the information > provided. Notably, your networking setup and the RAM / CPU SKUs are > important inputs. > > Assuming that the hosts have or would have sufficient CPU and RAM for the > additional OSDs there wouldn’t necessarily be a downside, though you might > wish to use a gradual balancing strategy. > > The new drives are double the size of the old, so unless you take steps > they will get double the PGs and thus double the workload of the existing > drives. But since you aren’t subject to the SATA bottleneck, unless your > hosts are PCI Gen 3 and your networking insufficient, I suspect that you’ll > be fine. > > You could use a custom device class and CRUSH rule to segregate the > larger/faster drives into their own pool(s), but if you’re adding capacity > for existing use-cases, I’d probably just go for it and celebrate the > awesome hardware. > > > > On Jan 24, 2025, at 9:35 AM, Bruno Gomes Pessanha < > bruno.pessanha@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I have a Ceph Reef cluster with 10 hosts with 16 nvme slots but only half > > occupied with 15TB (2400 KIOPS) drives. 80 drives in total. > > I want to add another 80 to fully populate the slots. The question: > > What would be the downside if I expand the cluster with 80 x 30TB (3300 > > KIOPS) drives? > > > > Thank you! > > > > Bruno > > _______________________________________________ > > ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx > > To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx > > -- Bruno Gomes Pessanha _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
 |