> Op 12 juli 2016 om 12:35 schreef Simon Murray 
> <simon.mur...@datacentred.co.uk>:
> 
> 
> Hi all.
> 
> I'm about to perform a rather large reorganization of our cluster and
> thought I'd get some insight from the community before going any further.
> 
> The current state we have (logically) is two trees, one for spinning rust,
> one for SSD.  Chassis are the current failure domain, and are all chassis
> types are organized under a single rack.
> 
> The machines have been physically been relocated across 4 racks and I have
> re-written the crush map to organize it so the chassis are correctly
> located in the correct racks.  I intend to also change the rules so that
> the failure domain is now at the rack level so we can tolerate more severe
> power and switching failure.
> 
> Question is how is the best way to do this?
> 
> 1) The pragmatist in me says commit the new crush map, let things
> rebalance, then apply a new rule set to each pool and again let things
> rebalance.
> 

Yes, that would be easy to do. Also, you can always revert to the old situation 
if you need to.

> 2) It would however mean much less scheduled maintenance and keep customers
> happier if I could just do everything as a big bang and do everything at
> once e.g. rename the existing rule sets to replicated_rack_leaf(_ssd), and
> change the chooseleaf option to type rack, and hope for the best :)
> 
> Is the latter safe or just plain crazy?

A big change can be easier for Ceph. You simply limit the backfill and recovery 
to one at a time and let it run.

You could also create new rulesets which do the mapping in a different way and 
switch per pool to the new rulesets.

Wido

> 
> Si
> 
> -- 
> DataCentred Limited registered in England and Wales no. 05611763
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to