On 15/03/2016 09:51, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
On 15/03/16 22:21, Peter Brouwer wrote:
On 10/03/2016 05:14, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
Hmm, I'm confused by the phrase 'partitions that point to the same
disk':
PArtitions is used in the swift context, i.e. the partitions scheme the
ring-builder uses.
I'm sorry but that does not make sense. The ring builder lets you add
*devices*. Now a device could be a partition (e.g /dev/sdc1) as
opposed to a complete disk (/dev/sdc) but I'm at a loss to see where
you are going with this, as the ring builder is essentially partition
un-aware.
See https://ask.openstack.org/en/question/6766/what-is-a-swift-partition/
I'm assuming a whole physical disk is used, i.e.
filesystem created on a disk using the whole physical disk.
So the ring structure provides a reference to a swift partition and a
disk location, right?
Hmm...this partition word again...you are talking about a whole disk,
so there is no partition (or the 'partition is = the entire disk - you
have added a whole disk after all).
What happens if the disk it is pointing to is full, does swift returns
an error to the app/client or does it try a re-lookup in an attempt to
find space elsewhere?
I think I answered that previously. Swift can survive *some* of the
disks being full, but eventually you'll get a PUT failure for
objects/containers (a 50x http error), and you will be unable to add
any more until you:
- add more disks to existing servers (or)
- add more servers and disks
and amend the ring with these additional devices.
regards
Mark
--
Regards,
Peter Brouwer, Principal Software Engineer,
Oracle Application Integration Engineering.
Phone: +44 1506 672767, Mobile +44 7720 598 226
E-Mail: peter.brou...@oracle.com
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org
Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
