Hi,ceph-dev
Sorry for trouble you, I am tracing a issus in radosgw
[root@ceph101 ~]# ceph -s
cluster e063f9a5-2e80-469e-a4ce-e31f9c6b4046
health HEALTH_WARN noout,noscrub,nodeep-scrub flag(s) set
monmap e3: 3 mons at
{ceph101=10.150.130.101:6789/0,ceph102=10.150.130.102:6789/0
hi, all
Test RGW found, put more than 1G file to bucket.monitor network
traffic, detect network traffic fluctuates greatly, even no traffic,
hope you can help me.
thx,
yapeng
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kerne
Original Message-
From: ceph-devel-ow...@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:ceph-devel-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Guang Yang
Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2015 1:26 PM
To: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org; Yehuda Sadeh
Subject: Re: Symbolic links like feature on radosgw
Hi Yehuda,
We have a user re
On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 9:20 PM, Guang Yang wrote:
> Hi Yehuda,
> We have a user requirement that needs symbolic link like feature on radosgw
> - two object ids pointing to the same object (ideally it could cross bucket,
> but same bucket is fine).
>
> The closest feature on Amaz
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 21:25:31 -0800
Guang Yang wrote:
> Is this a valid feature request we can put into radosgw? The way I am
> thinking to implement is like symbolic link, the link object just
> contains a pointer to the original object.
It's not going to be sufficient. What do
Hi Yehuda,
We have a user requirement that needs symbolic link like feature on
radosgw - two object ids pointing to the same object (ideally it could
cross bucket, but same bucket is fine).
The closest feature on Amazon S3 I could find is [1], but not exact
the same, the one from Amazon S3 API
On 2/25/15 2:31 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> Hey,
>
> We are considering switching to civetweb (the embedded/standalone rgw web
> server) as the primary supported RGW frontend instead of the current
> apache + mod-fastcgi or mod-proxy-fcgi approach. "Supported" here means
> both the primary platform
On 11/02/2015 06:01 PM, Martin Millnert wrote:
> Minimum the documentation at
> http://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/radosgw/config-ref/ could be blessed
> with an entry on 'rgw frontends', including notes on how to configure it
> for loopback-binding access only.
Agreed: h
default and let the user choose
> otherwise.
I +1 that it should default to localhost.
The civetweb-way to configure this is documented at section
"listening_ports" in
https://github.com/civetweb/civetweb/blob/master/docs/UserManual.md
In ceph radosgw terms it'd be akin to:
r
On 10/06/2015 11:03 AM, Luis Periquito wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was trying to get radosgw to authenticate using API v3, as I thought
> it would be relatively straightforward, but my C++ is not up to
> standard.
>
> That and the time it takes to compile and make the radosgw binary
Hi,
I was trying to get radosgw to authenticate using API v3, as I thought
it would be relatively straightforward, but my C++ is not up to
standard.
That and the time it takes to compile and make the radosgw binary is
way too long. Is there a way to just compile radosgw so I can make the
tests
.com/
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 5:31 AM, Srikanth Madugundi
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After upgrading to Hammer and moving from apache to civetweb. We
> started seeing high PUT latency in the order of 2 sec for every PUT
> request. The GET request lo
>
> Attaching the radosgw logs for
:68a23e70b5854263ab64f2ddc16c2a38.buckets
68a23e70b5854263ab64f2ddc16c2a38:68a23e70b5854263ab64f2ddc16c2a38
where '68a23e70b5854263ab64f2ddc16c2a38' in an account ID.
It's also worth to mention that accounts and users in radosgw are
a bit blurred - RGWUserInfo describes both entities. I'm vi
ntication system, I thought. That didn't work and now we
have the tenant$user syntax allowed all over.
What I mean by that, a client has to do "swift -U tenant\$user:subuser -K pass"
in 5073, and that looks a bit fraught. I presume you avoided that.
Specifically though, imagine I&
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Radoslaw Zarzynski
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> It's a well-known trait of radosgw that an user cannot create new
> bucket with a given name if the name is already occupied by other
> user's bucket (request to do that will be rejected with 409 Co
On 14-09-15 17:05, Sage Weil wrote:
> radosgw now runs as ceph:ceph under systemd. /run/ceph-rgw is 755 owned
> as the web user. I think this will break anybody using apache and
> fastcgi. That's not the default, but I don't think that combo
> makes any sense
radosgw now runs as ceph:ceph under systemd. /run/ceph-rgw is 755 owned
as the web user. I think this will break anybody using apache and
fastcgi. That's not the default, but I don't think that combo
makes any sense anyway.
Should we...
- make /run/ceph-rgw ceph:ceph 0755
Hello,
It's a well-known trait of radosgw that an user cannot create new
bucket with a given name if the name is already occupied by other
user's bucket (request to do that will be rejected with 409 Conflict).
This behaviour is entirely expected in S3. However, when it comes
to Swi
On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 14:23:33 +0200
Radoslaw Zarzynski wrote:
> What is the current status of multi-tenancy support in radosgw?
> I saw branch wip-ymt-5073 which looks really nice.
That branch is actually an clone of wip-5073-3, only I made it build on the
current code (about 9.0.2 leve
On 08/27/2015 06:36 AM, Lorieri wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm debugging a golang aws client and I've noticed it makes absolute
> uri requests on amazon.
> http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec5.html#sec5.1.2
>
> it would be great if radosgw implement it.
>
Hi,
I'm debugging a golang aws client and I've noticed it makes absolute
uri requests on amazon.
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec5.html#sec5.1.2
it would be great if radosgw implement it.
cheers,
-lorieri
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
ug 2015 07:44:34 -0700
> Subject: Re: radosgw - stuck ops
> From: ysade...@redhat.com
> To: yguan...@outlook.com
> CC: sw...@redhat.com; sj...@redhat.com; yeh...@redhat.com;
> ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
>
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 3:23 PM, GuangYang wrote:
>> Thank
2 sec for every PUT
request. The GET request lo
Attaching the radosgw logs for a single request. The ceph.conf has the
following configuration for civetweb.
[client.radosgw.gateway]
rgw frontends = civetweb port=5632
Further investion reveled the call to get_data() at
https://github.com/ceph/ceph
Hi,
After upgrading to Hammer and moving from apache to civetweb. We
started seeing high PUT latency in the order of 2 sec for every PUT
request. The GET request lo
Attaching the radosgw logs for a single request. The ceph.conf has the
following configuration for civetweb
; mechanism to avoid infinite waiting at radosgw side:
> 1.1. radosgw - send OP with a *fast_fail* flag
> 1.2. OSD - reply with -EAGAIN if the PG is *inactive* and the
> *fast_fail* flag is set
> 1.3. radosgw - upon receiving -EAGAIN, retry till a timeout interval is
>
Thanks for Sage, Yehuda and Sam's quick reply.
Given the discussion so far, could I summarize into the following bullet points:
1> The first step we would like to pursue is to implement the following
mechanism to avoid infinite waiting at radosgw side:
1.1. radosgw - send O
ready.
Yehuda
>
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 8:41 AM, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 6:53 PM, GuangYang wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Yehuda,
>>> Recently with our pre-production clusters (with radosgw), we had an outage
&
of time which
>> > PG(s) a request is going to touch (it'll generally be a lot of them)?
>> >
>>
>> Barring pgls() and such, each rados request that radosgw produces will
>> only touch a single pg, right?
>
> Oh, yeah. I thought you meant before each RGW r
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 9:48 AM, GuangYang wrote:
> Hi Yehuda,
> Thanks for the quick response. My comments inline..
>
> Thanks,
> Guang
>
>> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 08:41:26 -0700
>> Subject: Re: radosgw - stuck ops
>> Fr
brados which we don't have right now afaik.
> >> Sage / Sam, does that make sense, and/or possible?
> >
> > This seems mostly impossible because we don't know ahead of time which
> > PG(s) a request is going to touch (it'll generally be a lot of them)?
>
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 9:55 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Aug 2015, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 6:53 PM, GuangYang wrote:
>> Hi Yehuda,
>> Recently with our pre-production clusters (with radosgw), we had
>> an outage that
Hi Yehuda,
Thanks for the quick response. My comments inline..
Thanks,
Guang
> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 08:41:26 -0700
> Subject: Re: radosgw - stuck ops
> From: ysade...@redhat.com
> To: yguan...@outlook.com; sw...@redhat.com; sj...@redhat.co
On Tue, 4 Aug 2015, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 6:53 PM, GuangYang wrote:
> Hi Yehuda,
> Recently with our pre-production clusters (with radosgw), we had
> an outage that all radosgw worker threads got stuck and all
> clients requ
our pre-production clusters (with radosgw), we had an outage
>> that all radosgw worker threads got stuck and all clients request resulted
>> in 500 because that there is no worker thread taking care of them.
>>
>> What we observed from the cluster, is that there was a PG stu
Hi Yehuda,
Recently with our pre-production clusters (with radosgw), we had an outage that
all radosgw worker threads got stuck and all clients request resulted in 500
because that there is no worker thread taking care of them.
What we observed from the cluster, is that there was a PG stuck at
http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/12407
Thanks,
-Pavan.
-Original Message-
From: Sage Weil [mailto:s...@newdream.net]
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 7:19 PM
To: Pavan Rallabhandi
Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org; Srinivasula Maram; Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
Subject: Re: start-stop-daemon radosgw
On
oot', we are unable to get multiple RGW daemons run on a client
> machine.
>
> The start-stop-daemon complains than an instance of 'radosgw' is already
> running, by starting the first daemon in the configuration and bails out from
> starting further in
ins than an instance of 'radosgw' is already
running, by starting the first daemon in the configuration and bails out from
starting further instances:
+ start-stop-daemon --start -u root -x /usr/bin/radosgw -- -n
client.radosgw.gateway-3
/usr/bin/radosgw already running.
<
On Tue, 16 Jun 2015 12:43:08 -0700 (PDT)
Sage Weil wrote:
> With hammer the size of object_info_t crossed the 255 byte boundary, which
> is the max xattr value that XFS can inline. We've since merged something
> that stripes over several small xattrs so that we can keep things inline,
> but i
;GuangYang"
> Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, ceph-us...@lists.ceph.com
> Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2015 2:21:04 PM
> Subject: Re: radosgw crash within libfcgi
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "GuangYang"
> > To: "Yehuda Sadeh-Weinr
- Original Message -
> From: "GuangYang"
> To: "Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub"
> Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, ceph-us...@lists.ceph.com
> Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2015 2:12:23 PM
> Subject: RE: radosgw crash within libfcgi
>
> -
> Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 17:04:05 -0400
> From: yeh...@redhat.com
> To: yguan...@outlook.com
> CC: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org; ceph-us...@lists.ceph.com
> Subject: Re: radosgw crash within libfcgi
>
>
>
> - Original Messag
- Original Message -
> From: "GuangYang"
> To: "Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub"
> Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, ceph-us...@lists.ceph.com
> Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2015 1:53:20 PM
> Subject: RE: radosgw crash within libfcgi
>
> Thanks Yehuda
: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org; ceph-us...@lists.ceph.com
> Subject: Re: radosgw crash within libfcgi
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "GuangYang"
>> To: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, ceph-us...@lists.ceph.com, yeh...@redhat.com
>> Sent: Wednesday, Jun
- Original Message -
> From: "GuangYang"
> To: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, ceph-us...@lists.ceph.com, yeh...@redhat.com
> Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2015 10:09:58 AM
> Subject: radosgw crash within libfcgi
>
> Hello Cephers,
> Recently we have several
Hello Cephers,
Recently we have several radosgw daemon crashes with the same following kernel
log:
Jun 23 14:17:38 xxx kernel: radosgw[68180]: segfault at f0 ip 7ffa069996f2
sp 7ff55c432710 error 6 in libfcgi.so.0.0.0[7ffa06995000+a000] in
libfcgi.so.0.0.0[7ffa06995000+a000]
Looking
On Wed, 17 Jun 2015, Nathan Cutler wrote:
> > We've since merged something
> > that stripes over several small xattrs so that we can keep things inline,
> > but it hasn't been backported to hammer yet. See
> > c6cdb4081e366f471b372102905a1192910ab2da.
>
> Hi Sage:
>
> You wrote "yet" - should
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Nathan Cutler wrote:
>> We've since merged something
>> that stripes over several small xattrs so that we can keep things inline,
>> but it hasn't been backported to hammer yet. See
>> c6cdb4081e366f471b372102905a1192910ab2da.
>
> Hi Sage:
>
> You wrote "yet" - sh
> We've since merged something
> that stripes over several small xattrs so that we can keep things inline,
> but it hasn't been backported to hammer yet. See
> c6cdb4081e366f471b372102905a1192910ab2da.
Hi Sage:
You wrote "yet" - should we earmark it for hammer backport?
Nathan
--
To unsubscri
ceph-devel-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sage Weil
> Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 3:43 AM
> To: GuangYang
> Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org; ceph-us...@lists.ceph.com
> Subject: Re: xattrs vs. omap with radosgw
>
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2015, GuangYang wrote:
> > Hi Cephers,
> &g
...@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:ceph-devel-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sage Weil
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 3:43 AM
To: GuangYang
Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org; ceph-us...@lists.ceph.com
Subject: Re: xattrs vs. omap with radosgw
On Tue, 16 Jun 2015, GuangYang wrote:
> Hi Cephers,
> While looking a
On 06/16/2015 03:48 PM, GuangYang wrote:
Thanks Sage for the quick response.
It is on Firefly v0.80.4.
While trying to put with *rados* directly, the xattrs can be inline. The
problem comes to light when using radosgw, since we have a bunch of metadata to
keep via xattrs, including
Thanks Sage for the quick response.
It is on Firefly v0.80.4.
While trying to put with *rados* directly, the xattrs can be inline. The
problem comes to light when using radosgw, since we have a bunch of metadata to
keep via xattrs, including:
rgw.idtag : 15 bytes
rgw.manifest : 381
On Tue, 16 Jun 2015, GuangYang wrote:
> Hi Cephers,
> While looking at disk utilization on OSD, I noticed the disk was constantly
> busy with large number of small writes, further investigation showed that, as
> radosgw uses xattrs to store metadata (e.g. etag, content-type, etc.), w
sers [mailto:ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com] On Behalf Of
GuangYang
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2015 11:31 AM
To: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org; ceph-us...@lists.ceph.com
Subject: [ceph-users] xattrs vs. omap with radosgw
Hi Cephers,
While looking at disk utilization on OSD, I noticed the disk was constantly
Hi Cephers,
While looking at disk utilization on OSD, I noticed the disk was constantly
busy with large number of small writes, further investigation showed that, as
radosgw uses xattrs to store metadata (e.g. etag, content-type, etc.), which
made the xattrs get from local to extents, which
- Original Message -
> From: "Loic Dachary"
> To: "Yehuda Sadeh"
> Cc: "Ceph Development" , "Abhishek L"
>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 2:43:12 AM
> Subject: radosgw and the next giant release v0.87.2
>
> Hi Ye
Hi Yehuda,
The next giant release as found at https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/giant
passed the rgw suite (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11153#rgw). One run had a
transient failure (http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11259) that did not repeat.
You will also find traces of failed run because of
Hi Alfredo,
Sorry for replying very very late. I had to temporarly descope my actions on
rados gateway federation
The radosgw-agent is installed properly; that's fine.
We still have problems setting up federation between two sites.
One is at Orange Sillicon Valley (OSV@San Francisco)
nkel
>
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: ceph-devel-ow...@vger.kernel.org
> [mailto:ceph-devel-ow...@vger.kernel.org] Im Auftrag von Sage Weil
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 25. Februar 2015 20:32
> An: ceph-us...@ceph.com; ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
> Betreff: who is using radosgw with civet
+1 for proxy. Keep the civetweb lean and mean and if people need
"extras" let the proxy handle this. Proxies are easy to set-up and a
simple example could be included in the documentation.
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>
>
>> Op 26 feb. 2015 om 18:22 heeft Sage Weil
[client.radosgw.gateway]
host = radosgw1
keyring = /etc/ceph/ceph.client.radosgw.keyring
rgw socket path = /var/run/ceph/ceph.radosgw.gateway.fastcgi.sock
log file = /var/log/radosgw/client.radosgw.gateway.log
rgw print continue = false
rgw enable ops log = false
rgw ops log rados = false
rgw ops
> Op 26 feb. 2015 om 18:22 heeft Sage Weil het volgende
> geschreven:
>
>> On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Wido den Hollander wrote:
>>> On 25-02-15 20:31, Sage Weil wrote:
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> We are considering switching to civetweb (the embedded/standalone rgw web
>>> server) as the primary supported RGW
Behalf Of Robert LeBlanc
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 12:27 PM
To: Sage Weil
Cc: Ceph-User; ceph-devel
Subject: Re: [ceph-users] who is using radosgw with civetweb?
Thanks, we were able to get it up and running very quickly. If it performs
well, I don't see any reason to use Apache+fast_c
el-ow...@vger.kernel.org] Im Auftrag von Sage Weil
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 25. Februar 2015 20:32
An: ceph-us...@ceph.com; ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Betreff: who is using radosgw with civetweb?
Hey,
We are considering switching to civetweb (the embedded/standalone rgw web
server) as the primary supp
gt; We tried to get radosgw working with Apache + mod_fastcgi, but due to
>> the changes in radosgw, Apache, mode_*cgi, etc and the documentation
>> lagging and not having a lot of time to devote to it, we abandoned it.
>> Where it the documentation for civetweb? If it is appliance
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Wido den Hollander wrote:
> On 25-02-15 20:31, Sage Weil wrote:
> > Hey,
> >
> > We are considering switching to civetweb (the embedded/standalone rgw web
> > server) as the primary supported RGW frontend instead of the current
> > apache + mod-fastcgi or mod-proxy-fcgi approa
Sage Weil redhat.com> writes:
> Have you seen any problems? Any other feedback? The hope is to (vastly)
> simplify deployment.
What about the memory footprint? In some cases the civetweb frontend
performs an additional buffering to properly calculate the size of a content
and to attach the "C
e civetweb frontend is built into the radosgw process, so for the most
>part you just have to get radosgw started and configured. It isn't well
>documented yet, but basically just skip everything that has anythig to do
>with fastcgi or apache. For example, if you follow the docs, y
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Michael Kuriger wrote:
> I¹d also like to set this up. I¹m not sure where to begin. When you say
> enabled by default, where is it enabled?
The civetweb frontend is built into the radosgw process, so for the most
part you just have to get radosgw started and conf
I¹d also like to set this up. I¹m not sure where to begin. When you say
enabled by default, where is it enabled?
Many thanks,
Mike
On 2/25/15, 1:49 PM, "Sage Weil" wrote:
>On Wed, 25 Feb 2015, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>> We tried to get radosgw working with Apache + mod_
On 25-02-15 20:31, Sage Weil wrote:
Hey,
We are considering switching to civetweb (the embedded/standalone rgw web
server) as the primary supported RGW frontend instead of the current
apache + mod-fastcgi or mod-proxy-fcgi approach. "Supported" here means
both the primary platform the upstrea
gt; To: ceph-us...@ceph.com; ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: [ceph-users] who is using radosgw with civetweb?
>
> Hey,
>
> We are considering switching to civetweb (the embedded/standalone rgw web
> server) as the primary supported RGW frontend instead of the current
> apach
On 26/02/15 11:50, Tom Deneau wrote:
Sage Weil redhat.com> writes:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2015, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
We tried to get radosgw working with Apache + mod_fastcgi, but due to
the changes in radosgw, Apache, mode_*cgi, etc and the documentation
lagging and not having a lot of time
Sage Weil redhat.com> writes:
>
> On Wed, 25 Feb 2015, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> > We tried to get radosgw working with Apache + mod_fastcgi, but due to
> > the changes in radosgw, Apache, mode_*cgi, etc and the documentation
> > lagging and not having a lot of time to
It'd be nice to see a standard/recommended LB and HA approach for RGW
with supporting documentation too.
On 26 February 2015 at 06:31, Sage Weil wrote:
> Hey,
>
> We are considering switching to civetweb (the embedded/standalone rgw web
> server) as the primary supported RGW frontend instead of t
Cool, I'll see if we have some cycles to look at it.
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:49 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Feb 2015, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
>> We tried to get radosgw working with Apache + mod_fastcgi, but due to
>> the changes in radosgw, Apache, mode_*cgi, etc a
On Wed, 25 Feb 2015, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> We tried to get radosgw working with Apache + mod_fastcgi, but due to
> the changes in radosgw, Apache, mode_*cgi, etc and the documentation
> lagging and not having a lot of time to devote to it, we abandoned it.
> Where it the docum
We tried to get radosgw working with Apache + mod_fastcgi, but due to
the changes in radosgw, Apache, mode_*cgi, etc and the documentation
lagging and not having a lot of time to devote to it, we abandoned it.
Where it the documentation for civetweb? If it is appliance like and
easy to set-up, we
Hey,
We are considering switching to civetweb (the embedded/standalone rgw web
server) as the primary supported RGW frontend instead of the current
apache + mod-fastcgi or mod-proxy-fcgi approach. "Supported" here means
both the primary platform the upstream development focuses on and what the
Hi all,
Context : Firefly 0.80.8, Ubuntu 14.04 LTS, Lab cluster
Yesterday, I successfully deleted a s3 bucket "Bucket001ghis" after removing
the contents that were in.
Today, as I was browsing the radosgw system metadata, I discovered an
difference between the bucket metada
So if I have Apache 2.4.9+, would I use
ProxyPass / unix:///tmp/.radosgw.sock|fcgi://localhost:9000/
and in ceph.conf use
rgw socket path = /tmp/.radosgw.sock
If so, how does the radosgw process know about port 9000?
Or do I need a "rgw frontends" statement to specify tha
n the radosgw setup.
By the way, the page that talked about setting things up for the PHP-FPM
also had this Directory record in the conf file. Do we need anything of that
sort for radosgw?
Order allow,deny
Allow from all
AllowOverride FileInfo All
# New directive need
On 02/11/2015 05:21 PM, Deneau, Tom wrote:
> I am running on a platform (aarch64) for which there are no
> pre-built binaries of the ceph patched apache and the ceph patched
> mod_fastcgi.
Hi Tom,
The ceph-patched Apache had numerous outstanding CVEs, and I discourage
users from running it any mo
- Original Message -
> From: "Tom Deneau"
> To: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 4:21:46 PM
> Subject: using radosgw with mod_proxy_fcgi
>
> I am a Ceph novice and have the rados and rbd setups working and would like
> to u
I am a Ceph novice and have the rados and rbd setups working and would like to
use the radosgw stack.
I am running on a platform (aarch64) for which there are no pre-built binaries
of the ceph patched apache and the ceph patched mod_fastcgi. But since I
gather from the mail lists that the
vger.kernel.org
Sent: Thursday, February 5, 2015 9:42:09 AM
Subject: RE: [Ceph-devel] radosgw-agent failed to parse
HI
Thanks a lot
I installed the last version using (pip install radosgw-agent) as recommended
after removing the current version (apt-get purge radosgw-agent)
The python scripts are n
HI
Thanks a lot
I installed the last version using (pip install radosgw-agent) as recommended
after removing the current version (apt-get purge radosgw-agent)
The python scripts are now installed in /usr/local/bin/./radosgw_agent
instead of /usr/bin/../radosgw_agent
Can you tell me
latest agent
available
from the Python package Index (PyPI) with a Python installer (e.g.
`pip install radosgw-agent`) or if you feel comfortable use the latest
tip
from the master branch (I advice to use the former).
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 5:12 AM, wrote:
> Hi Alfredo,
>
> Here are
Hi Alfredo,
Here are the logs you requested using the original client.py python script.
--
DIRECT LAUNCH USING CLI:KO
radosgw-agent -v -c /etc/ceph/radosgw-agent/fr-rennes-radosgw1-sync.conf_direct
the standard output is also
tank.com] De la part de
> Alfredo Deza
> Envoyé : lundi 2 février 2015 16:59
> À : CHEVALIER Ghislain IMT/OLPS
> Cc :
> Objet : Re: [Ceph-devel] radosgw-agent failed to parse
>
> That sounds suspicious because we haven't packaged a 1.2.1 release.
>
> The latest
devel] radosgw-agent failed to parse
That sounds suspicious because we haven't packaged a 1.2.1 release.
The latest on PyPI is 1.2, which is the same in the master branch.
Would you mind sending logs that show *how* the url is malformed (both when it
is OK and when it is not) ?
On Mon, Feb
> HI,
>
> Thx for replying
>
> According to dpkg -l, it's 1.2.1.
>
> I noticed that the URL is malformed when launching using directly
> radosgw-agent -c
> but well formed when launching using service radosgw-agent start
>
> best regards
>
> -Messa
HI,
Thx for replying
According to dpkg -l, it's 1.2.1.
I noticed that the URL is malformed when launching using directly radosgw-agent
-c
but well formed when launching using service radosgw-agent start
best regards
-Message d'origine-
De : alfredo.d...@i
What version of the agent are you using? And when it fails, how does
the log output look?
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 8:56 AM, wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Context : Ubuntu 14.04 TLS firefly 0.80.8
>
> I sent this post in ceph-users (identical subject) because I recently
> encountered the same issue.
> Mayb
Hi all,
Context : Ubuntu 14.04 TLS firefly 0.80.8
I sent this post in ceph-users (identical subject) because I recently
encountered the same issue.
Maybe I missed something between July and January...
I found that the http request wasn't correctly formed by
/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/
On 29/01/15 18:28 , Yehuda Sadeh wrote:
[...]
Looks like you may be hitting http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10062,
where s3 POST requests were failing with keystone. There is a patch that
is merged in master[1] that addresses this. We would also love
to see this ported back to firefly/giant.
I j
Right, the we should call strict_strtoll() instead. I opened issue
#10701, and sent a pull request for the fix.
Thanks,
Yehuda
On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 10:01 AM, Axel Dunkel wrote:
>
> >
>> > Telling from the source code the issue seems not to be that the
> content
>> > lengths do not match, rat
>
> > Telling from the source code the issue seems not to be that the
content
> > lengths do not match, rather that the http-header Content-Length is
not
> > parseable (allthough the header is displayed fine in the debug
output). If
> > strict_strtol returns an error, to be exact - ?
> >
>
>
von Yehuda
Sadeh
Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Januar 2015 17:39
An: Axel Dunkel
Cc: ceph-devel
Betreff: Re: radosgw: bad content length
On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 8:22 AM, Axel Dunkel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> there are issues with radosgw and large file transfers without using
> multiparts (like
1 - 100 of 504 matches
Mail list logo
