On Thursday, April 19, 2012 at 2:07 AM, Damien Churchill wrote: > On 18 April 2012 21:41, Greg Farnum <gregory.far...@dreamhost.com > (mailto:gregory.far...@dreamhost.com)> wrote: > > That should get everything back up and running. The one sour note is that > > due to the bug in the past, your data (ie, filesystem) and vmimages pools > > have gotten conflated. It shouldn't cause any issues (they use very > > different naming schemes), but they're tied together in terms of > > replication and the raw pool statistics. > > (If that's important you can create a new pool and move the rbd images to > > it.) > > > > Thanks a lot Greg! > > All back up and running now. What negative side effects could having > the pools mixed together have, given that I'm not doing any special > placement of them?
There shouldn't be any negative side effects from it at all. It just means that you've got a mixed namespace, and if you don't care about that none of our current tools do either. (Something like the still-entirely-theoretical ceph-fsck probably wouldn't appreciate it, but we don't have anything like that right now.) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
