On 07.06.2013, at 16:57, Stefan Priebe <s.pri...@profihost.ag> wrote:
> Am 07.06.2013 16:31, schrieb Sage Weil: >> On Fri, 7 Jun 2013, Oliver Schulz wrote: > >> Btrfs is the longer-term plan, but we haven't done as much testing there >> yet, and in particular, there is a bug in 3.9 that is triggered by a >> power-cycle and the fixes aren't yet backported to 3.9 stable. Until we >> have done more validation, we still recommend XFS. >> >> The last time we did aging tests on btrfs performance was very good >> (better than xfs) initially but then trailed off as things fragmented. >> This was ~3.2 era. We haven't repeated that yet for newer kernels. I >> suspect it is better now, but I don't know how much better... Just another data point - we have 10 servers with 64 OSD all on btrfs. Initially we started out with Ubuntu 12.10 servers, but experienced btrfs related kernel panics and have migrated the offending servers to 13.04. Yesterday one of these machines locked up with btrfs issues (that weren't easily diagnosed) I have now started on migrating our OSD to xfs … (taking them out, making new filesystem on drive, putting them back into cluster again) cheers jc -- SWITCH Jens-Christian Fischer, Peta Solutions Werdstrasse 2, P.O. Box, 8021 Zurich, Switzerland phone +41 44 268 15 15, direct +41 44 268 15 71 jens-christian.fisc...@switch.ch http://www.switch.ch http://www.switch.ch/socialmedia
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
