Re: [ceph-users] All pgs stuck peering

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

misc: ignore some unusable block devices

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

Re: The max single write IOPS on single RBD

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

Issue with Ceph File System and LIO

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,

Re: Stable release HOWTO: hunt for lost page

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

Stable release HOWTO: hunt for lost page

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

Improving Data-At-Rest encryption in Ceph

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

Re: Stable release HOWTO: hunt for lost page

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

RE: ceph-mon terminated with status 28

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:

Re: ceph-mon terminated with status 28

- 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

Re: Improving Data-At-Rest encryption in Ceph

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

Re: Improving Data-At-Rest encryption in Ceph

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

Re: OSD public / cluster network isolation using VRF:s

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.

Re: Stable release HOWTO: hunt for lost page

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

Re: misc: ignore some unusable block devices

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

Re: misc: ignore some unusable block devices

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

ceph branch status

-- 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

Issues installing on CentOS 7.1

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

Re: Improving Data-At-Rest encryption in Ceph

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

Re: Improving Data-At-Rest encryption in Ceph

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

Re: Notes from a discussion a design to allow EC overwrites

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