Sage Weil wrote:
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015, Alex Elsayed wrote:
Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi Alex,
On 17/08/2015 22:19, Alex Elsayed wrote:
snip
This is where I see a subtle, but meaningful distinction: Accepting
from aliases *which have submitted a DCO* means that the person behind
Loic Dachary wrote:
On 17/08/2015 22:58, Alex Elsayed wrote:
The S-o-B tag, then, simply says If you look, you'll find my affirmation
of intent to follow the DCO - it is not, in itself, anything other than
a pointer. This prevents people from copypasta'ing the S-o-B line as a
magic
Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi Joao,
snipping quite a bit
It is quite impossible for us (non lawyers) to draw the line that
separates paranoïa and common sense. Reason why most discussions on these
topics turn short. I cannot dismiss the scenario you describe and I'm
quite sure asking a lawyer
Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi Alex,
On 17/08/2015 22:19, Alex Elsayed wrote:
snip
This is where I see a subtle, but meaningful distinction: Accepting from
aliases *which have submitted a DCO* means that the person behind the
alias, even if we don't know their name, has bound themselves
Sage Weil wrote:
On Tue, 4 Aug 2015, Wido den Hollander wrote:
On 03-08-15 22:25, Samuel Just wrote:
It seems like it's about time for us to make the jump to C++11. This
is probably going to have an impact on users of the librados C++
bindings. It seems like such users would have to
Sage Weil wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015, Alex Elsayed wrote:
snip for gmane
My thinking is more that the osd data = key makes a lot less sense in
the systemd world overall - passing the OSD the full path on the
commandline via some --datadir would mean you could trivially use
systemd's
Travis Rhoden wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Sage Weil sw...@redhat.com wrote:
Hey,
I've finally had some time to play with the systemd integration branch on
fedora 22. It's in wip-systemd and my current list of issues includes:
- after mon creation ceph-create-keys isn't run
Sage Weil wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015, Alex Elsayed wrote:
Sage Weil wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015, Alex Elsayed wrote:
snip some
Does it?
If the mount point is (say) /var/ceph/$UUID, and ceph-osd can take a --
datadir parameter from which it _reads_ the cluster and ID if they aren't
Sage Weil wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2015, Alex Elsayed wrote:
Travis Rhoden wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Sage Weil sw...@redhat.com wrote:
Hey,
I've finally had some time to play with the systemd integration branch
on
fedora 22. It's in wip-systemd and my current list
Owen Synge wrote:
snip
If I underwstand right you favor the user interface as:
--with-init=systemd
--with-init=sysv
--with-init=upstart
--with-init=bsd
Please do be sure to make --with-init=systemd respect the
--with-systemdsystemunitdir=PATH option, as some distros rely on that to
Loic Dachary wrote:
On 27/02/2015 23:47, Alex Elsayed wrote:
Loic Dachary wrote:
On 27/02/2015 13:59, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 3:58 AM, Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org wrote:
On 27/02/2015 00:59, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
- Original Message -
From
Loic Dachary wrote:
On 27/02/2015 13:59, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 3:58 AM, Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org wrote:
On 27/02/2015 00:59, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Sage Weil sw...@redhat.com,
Commentary inline.
Note that when I talk about dependencies, I'm speaking as someone who does
distro packaging - and thus what would require manual changes on the
packager's part vs. ability to specify general constraints.
Sage Weil wrote:
Hammer will most likely be v0.94[.x]. We're getting
Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Loic Dachary l...@dachary.org
To: Sage Weil sw...@redhat.com, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 3:38:31 PM
Subject: Re: ceph versions
Hi Sage,
I prefer Option D because it's self explanatory.
Sage Weil wrote:
Hey Mark,
I just watched Brendan Gregg's talk at SCALE (which was extremely good)
and one of the things he mentioned is the importance of
-fno-omit-frame-pointer. I notice we are setting it via do_autogen.sh
(i.e., for developers) but not in the production builds. Should
Sage Weil wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015, Alex Elsayed wrote:
Wido den Hollander wrote:
snip
Is it a sane thing to look at 'features' which pools could have? Other
features which might be set on a pool:
- Read Only (all write operations return -EPERM)
- Delete Protected
There's
Wido den Hollander wrote:
snip
Is it a sane thing to look at 'features' which pools could have? Other
features which might be set on a pool:
- Read Only (all write operations return -EPERM)
- Delete Protected
There's another pool feature I'd find very useful: a WORM flag, that permits
Sage Weil wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2014, Daniel Hofmann wrote:
The main issue however is not the hash's strength, but the fact that
once pre-computed, I'm able to use preimages on **every Ceph cluster out
there**. (As the hash functions's output is a deterministic function of
the object's name
Gregory Farnum wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Daniel Hofmann dan...@trvx.org wrote:
Preamble: you might want to read the decent formatted version of this
mail at:
https://gist.github.com/daniel-j-h/2daae2237bb21596c97d
snip aggressively
---
Ceph's object mapping depends on the
Gah, typed fletcher4 when I meant rjenkins - still, the same applies.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe ceph-devel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Sage Weil wrote:
[Adding ceph-devel]
On Mon, 21 Jul 2014, Wang, Zhiqiang wrote:
Sage,
I agree with you that promotion on the 2nd read could improve cache
tiering's performance for some kinds of workloads. The general idea here
is to implement some kinds of policies in the cache tier to
mark.doff...@codethink.co.uk wrote:
From: Mark Doffman mark.doff...@codethink.co.uk
Hi All,
The following is a third version of a patch series that adds the ability
to use a ceph distributed file system as the root device.
snip
Would you mind expanding on why you want to do this in the
Sage Weil wrote:
Now that the world seems to be converging on systemd, we need to sort out
a proper strategy for Ceph. Right now we have both sysvinit (old and
crufty but functional) and upstart, but neither are especially nice to
work with.
The first order of business is to identify
Jean-Tiare LE BIGOT wrote:
Hi,
I started to implement 'DISCARD' support in RBD kernel driver as
described on http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/190
This first (easy) step was to add at the end of
drivers/block/rbd.c:rbd_init_disk
/* Advertise discard support for aligned blocks */
Li Wang wrote:
Hi Alex,
Thanks for your comments.
On 11/13/2013 09:07 AM, Alex Elsayed wrote:
Li Wang wrote:
Hi,
We want to implement encryption support for Ceph.
Currently, we have the draft design,
1 When user mount a ceph directory for the first time, he can specify
Dan van der Ster wrote:
Hi Greg,
snip
AFAICT, this would allow single users to mount a subtree on CephFS and
prevent them from writing where they are not permitted. But our
use-case is different: we want to mount /cephfs/ from shared
workstations and batch nodes to store personal home
I posted this as a comment on the blueprint, but I figured I'd say it here:
The thing I'd worry about here is that LevelDB's performance (along with
that of various other K/V stores) falls off a cliff for large values.
Symas (who make LMDB, used by OpenLDAP) did some benchmarking that shows
Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi Alex,
If I understand correctly, part of what you propose is to make use of
fountain codes to optimize replicas transmissions. It could even be used
to speed up replication by allowing existing copies to contribute to the
completion of the others. Although this is
Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi Ceph,
snip
Reed-Solomon coding family is the only one that can keep the chuncks
unencoded and therefore concatenable.
snip
In my understanding, this is not strictly true - any 'systematic' code will
have the unencoded chunks remain available in this manner, and any
Alex Elsayed wrote:
Loic Dachary wrote:
Hi Ceph,
snip
Reed-Solomon coding family is the only one that can keep the chuncks
unencoded and therefore concatenable.
snip
In my understanding, this is not strictly true - any 'systematic' code
will have the unencoded chunks remain
dennis chen wrote:
Hi All,
Recently I want to use IBM AIX as the ceph client to take use of the
cephFS and rbd service from ceph,
but after some investigation, seem there's no support for AIX as the
ceph client. Is there some clues about this? or is there some workaround
that I can map a
Dan Mick dan.mick at inktank.com writes:
On 06/18/2012 11:01 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, Josh Durgin wrote:
$ rbd copyup pool2/child1
disown and adopt? :) (actually I started as a joke, but really I
kinda like that; fits with the parent-child name)
The issue I see
Martin Fick wrote:
Hello,
I have a questions with respect to RADOS and RBD and the cluster monitor
daemons.
I'm not one of the developers, but I've been following for a while and one
of your sub-questions intriqued me; specifically:
...This would open up the use of RBD devices for linux
33 matches
Mail list logo
