Thank you! That helps alot. On Mar 12, 2015 10:40 AM, "Steve Anthony" <sma...@lehigh.edu> wrote:
> Actually, it's more like 41TB. It's a bad idea to run at near full > capacity (by default past 85%) because you need some space where Ceph can > replicate data as part of its healing process in the event of disk or node > failure. You'll get a health warning when you exceed this ratio. > > You can use erasure coding to increase the amount of data you can store > beyond 41TB, but you'll still need some replicated disk as a caching layer > in front of the erasure coded pool if you're using RBD. See: > http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/2013-December/036430.html > > As to how much space you can save with erasure coding, that will depend on > if you're using RBD and need a cache layer and the values you set for k and > m (number of data chunks and coding chunks). There's been some discussion > on the list with regards to choosing those values. > > -Steve > > On 03/12/2015 10:07 AM, Thomas Foster wrote: > > I am looking into how I can maximize my space with replication, and I am > trying to understand how I can do that. > > I have 145TB of space and a replication of 3 for the pool and was > thinking that the max data I can have in the cluster is ~47TB in my cluster > at one time..is that correct? Or is there a way to get more data into the > cluster with less space using erasure coding? > > Any help would be greatly appreciated. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing > listceph-us...@lists.ceph.comhttp://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > > > -- > Steve Anthony > LTS HPC Support Specialist > Lehigh universitysma...@lehigh.edu > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
