Le 20/11/2023 à 09:24:41+, Frank Schilder a écrit
Hi,
Thanks everyone for your answer.
>
> we are using something similar for ceph-fs. For a backup system your setup
> can work, depending on how you back up. While HDD pools have poor IOP/s
> performance, they are very good for streaming
Shih; ceph-users@ceph.io
Subject: [ceph-users] Re: How to use hardware
Common motivations for this strategy include the lure of unit economics and RUs.
Often ultra dense servers can’t fill racks anyway due to power and weight
limits.
Here the osd_memory_target would have to be severely reduce
Common motivations for this strategy include the lure of unit economics and
RUs.
Often ultra dense servers can’t fill racks anyway due to power and weight
limits.
Here the osd_memory_target would have to be severely reduced to avoid
oomkilling. Assuming the OSDs are top load LFF HDDs with
Hello Albert,
5 vs 3 MON => you won't notice any difference
5 vs 3 MGR => by default, only 1 will be active
Le sam. 18 nov. 2023 à 09:28, Albert Shih a écrit :
> Le 17/11/2023 à 11:23:49+0100, David C. a écrit
>
> Hi,
>
> >
> > 5 instead of 3 mon will allow you to limit the impact if you
Le 17/11/2023 à 11:23:49+0100, David C. a écrit
Hi,
>
> 5 instead of 3 mon will allow you to limit the impact if you break a mon (for
> example, with the file system full)
>
> 5 instead of 3 MDS, this makes sense if the workload can be distributed over
> several trees in your file system.
Le 18/11/2023 à 02:31:22+0100, Simon Kepp a écrit
Hi,
> I know that your question is regarding the service servers, but may I ask, why
> you are planning to place so many OSDs ( 300) on so few OSD hosts( 6) (= 50
> OSDs per node)?
> This is possible to do, but sounds like the nodes were
I know that your question is regarding the service servers, but may I ask,
why you are planning to place so many OSDs ( 300) on so few OSD hosts( 6)
(= 50 OSDs per node)?
This is possible to do, but sounds like the nodes were designed for
scale-up rather than a scale-out architecture like ceph.
Hi Albert ,
5 instead of 3 mon will allow you to limit the impact if you break a mon
(for example, with the file system full)
5 instead of 3 MDS, this makes sense if the workload can be distributed
over several trees in your file system. Sometimes it can also make sense to
have several FSs in
