I am testing Linux Target SCSI, LIO, with a Ceph File System backstore
and I am seeing this error on my LIO gateway. I am using Ceph v9.2.0
on a 4.4rc4 Kernel, on Trusty, using a kernel mounted Ceph File
System. A file on the Ceph File System is exported via iSCSI to a
VMware ESXi 5.0 server, and
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 09:29:20PM +0800, Jaze Lee wrote:
> Should we add big packet test in heartbeat? Right now the heartbeat
> only test the little packet. If the MTU is mismatched, the heartbeat
> can not find that.
It would certainly have saved me a great deal of stress!
I imagine you wouldn
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Martin Millnert wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-12-14 at 12:28 -0800, Gregory Farnum wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 5:17 AM, Radoslaw Zarzynski
>
>> > In typical case ciphertext data transferred from OSD to OSD can be
>> > used without change. This is when both OSDs have
Just wanted to check if it is me or something else is going on. Is anyone
seeing the following when installing on CentOS 7.1? :
---
INFERNALIS ---
---
[vagrant@ceph ~]$ sudo yum install
http://down
On Mon, 2015-12-14 at 12:28 -0800, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 5:17 AM, Radoslaw Zarzynski
> > In typical case ciphertext data transferred from OSD to OSD can be
> > used without change. This is when both OSDs have the same crypto key
> > version for given placement group. In r
On Mon, 2015-12-14 at 14:17 +0100, Radoslaw Zarzynski wrote:
> Hello Folks,
>
> I would like to publish a proposal regarding improvements to Ceph
> data-at-rest encryption mechanism. Adam Kupczyk and I worked
> on that in last weeks.
>
> Initially we considered several architectural approaches an
- Original Message -
> From: "Tom Deneau"
> To: "Brad Hubbard"
> Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
> Sent: Tuesday, 15 December, 2015 3:21:27 AM
> Subject: RE: ceph-mon terminated with status 28
>
> Thanks, Brad. That was the problem.
Np.
>
> Is there a reason why we don't log more desc
I created a set of tickets for what I think needs to happen:
http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/14031. There's a doc linked from that
ticket with more details on the design.
-Sam
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Tianshan Qu wrote:
> Hi:
>
> sorry for half send.
>
> I'm working on this recently. I t
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 5:17 AM, Radoslaw Zarzynski
wrote:
> Hello Folks,
>
> I would like to publish a proposal regarding improvements to Ceph
> data-at-rest encryption mechanism. Adam Kupczyk and I worked
> on that in last weeks.
>
> Initially we considered several architectural approaches and m
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 9:58 AM, Loic Dachary wrote:
> Hi Abhishek,
>
> On 14/12/2015 15:40, Abhishek Varshney wrote:
>> Hi Loic,
>>
>> I have revived the page at
>> http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph-releases/wiki/HOWTO_triage_incoming_backport_pull_requests
>> from https://web.archive.org wit
On 14/12/2015 19:18, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 04:12:16PM +0100, Loic Dachary wrote:
>> Hi Robin,
>>
>> I removed misc: ignore some unusable block devices
>> 9c5eaeccb807d103884f46d174798dd982092696 from the openstack branch
>> because it fails on CentOS 7 with
>> the foll
On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 6:10 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Dec 2015, Martin Millnert wrote:
>> > Note that on a largish cluster the public/client traffic is all
>> > north-south, while the backend traffic is also mostly north-south to the
>> > top-of-rack and then east-west. I.e., within the ra
-- All Branches --
Abhishek Varshney
2015-11-23 11:45:29 +0530 infernalis-backports
Adam C. Emerson
2015-10-16 13:49:09 -0400 wip-cxx11time
2015-10-17 13:20:15 -0400 wip-cxx11concurrency
Adam Crume
2014-12-01 20:45:58 -0800 wip-doc-rbd-replay
Alfredo D
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 04:12:16PM +0100, Loic Dachary wrote:
> Hi Robin,
>
> I removed misc: ignore some unusable block devices
> 9c5eaeccb807d103884f46d174798dd982092696 from the openstack branch
> because it fails on CentOS 7 with
> the following. Could you please make a new pull request with i
Thanks, Brad. That was the problem.
Is there a reason why we don't log more descriptive info for this kind of
failure?
-- Tom
> -Original Message-
> From: Brad Hubbard [mailto:bhubb...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2015 4:19 PM
> To: Deneau, Tom
> Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.
If you are testing with "iodepth=1", I'd recommend testing with "rbd non
blocking aio = false" in your Ceph config file to see if that improves your
single-threaded IO performance.
--
Jason Dillaman
- Original Message -
> From: "Zhi Zhang"
> To: "Sage Weil"
> Cc: ceph-devel@vger.k
Hi Robin,
I removed misc: ignore some unusable block devices
9c5eaeccb807d103884f46d174798dd982092696 from the openstack branch because it
fails on CentOS 7 with
the following. Could you please make a new pull request with it so we can keep
testing it there ?
Thanks !
2015-12-14T14:37:36.305
Hi Abhishek,
On 14/12/2015 15:40, Abhishek Varshney wrote:
> Hi Loic,
>
> I have revived the page at
> http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph-releases/wiki/HOWTO_triage_incoming_backport_pull_requests
> from https://web.archive.org with a version cached on 4th October.
Perfect ! It has not change
Hi Loic,
I have revived the page at
http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph-releases/wiki/HOWTO_triage_incoming_backport_pull_requests
from https://web.archive.org with a version cached on 4th October.
Please review it, in case there are any changes to it.
Disabling the page deletion sounds like a
Hi,
It looks like we've lost
http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph-releases/wiki/HOWTO_triage_incoming_backport_pull_requests
. We can re-write it, of course, it's not that complex. But looking at the
index I can't find it (
http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph-releases/wiki/index ) and the a
Hello Folks,
I would like to publish a proposal regarding improvements to Ceph
data-at-rest encryption mechanism. Adam Kupczyk and I worked
on that in last weeks.
Initially we considered several architectural approaches and made
several iterations of discussions with Intel storage group. The prop
21 matches
Mail list logo
