On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 7:39 PM, Isaac Otsiabah zmoo...@yahoo.com wrote:
Yes, there were osd daemons running on the same node that the monitor was
running on. If that is the case then i will run a test case with the
monitor running on a different node where no osd is running and see what
Hello Sam and Gregory, i got machines today and tested it with the monitor
process running on a separate system with no osd daemons and i did not see the
problem. On Monday i will do a few test to confirm.
Isaac
- Original Message -
From: Sam Lang sam.l...@inktank.com
To: Isaac
jIsaac,
I'm sorry I haven't been able to wrangle any time to look into this
more yet, but Sage pointed out in a related thread that there might be
some buggy handling of things like this if the OSD and the monitor are
located on the same host. Am I correct in assuming that with your
small cluster,
Yes, there were osd daemons running on the same node that the monitor was
running on. If that is the case then i will run a test case with the
monitor running on a different node where no osd is running and see what
happens. Thank you.
Isaac
From: Gregory
Gregory, i recreated the osd down problem again this morning on two nodes
(g13ct, g14ct). First, i created a 1-node cluster on g13ct (with osd.0, 1 ,2)
and then added host g14ct (osd3. 4, 5). osd.1 went down for about 1 minute and
half after adding osd 3, 4, 5 were adde4d. i have included the
Gregory, the network physical layout is simple, the two networks are
separate. the 192.168.0 and the 192.168.1 are not subnets within a
network.
Isaac
- Original Message -
From: Gregory Farnum g...@inktank.com
To: Isaac Otsiabah zmoo...@yahoo.com
Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Isaac Otsiabah zmoo...@yahoo.com wrote:
Gregory, the network physical layout is simple, the two networks are
separate. the 192.168.0 and the 192.168.1 are not subnets within a
network.
Hi Isaac,
Could you send us your routing tables on the osds (route -n).
Gregory, i tried send the the attached debug output several times and
the mail server rejected them all probably becauseof the file size so i cut
the log file size down and it is attached. You will see the
reconnection failures by the error message line below. The ceph version
is 0.56
it
What's the physical layout of your networking? This additional log may prove
helpful as well, but I really need a bit more context in evaluating the
messages I see from the first one. :)
-Greg
On Thursday, January 24, 2013 at 9:24 AM, Isaac Otsiabah wrote:
Gregory, i tried send the the
On Monday, January 7, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Isaac Otsiabah wrote:
When i add a new host (with osd's) to my existing cluster, 1 or 2 previous
osd(s) goes down for about 2 minutes and then they come back up.
[root@h1ct ~]# ceph osd tree
# id weight type name up/down reweight
-1
3 root
10 matches
Mail list logo
