Hi all,
I ran into a problem during the teuthology test of proxy write. It is like this:
- Client sends 3 writes and a read on the same object to base tier
- Set up cache tiering
- Client retries ops and sends the 3 writes and 1 read to the cache tier
- The 3 writes finished on the base tier,
Hi Nathan,
Although v0.80.10 is not out yet, the odds of a discovering a problem that
would require an additional backport are low. I think you can start with
v0.80.11 without further delay :-)
Cheers
--
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital
We have a bunch of teuthology tests which build cache pool on top of an ec base
pool, and do partial object write. This is ok with the current cache tiering
implementation. But with proxy write, this won't work. In my testing, the error
message is something like below:
2015-05-20
Although v0.80.10 is not out yet, the odds of a discovering a problem that
would require an additional backport are low. I think you can start with
v0.80.11 without further delay :-)
As soon as I get over the flu :-(
Nathan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Alex Elder el...@ieee.org wrote:
On 05/21/2015 07:35 AM, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
- return -ETIMEDOUT instead of -EIO in case of timeout
- wait_event_interruptible_timeout() returns time left until timeout
and since it can be almost LONG_MAX we had better assign
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 11:18:40AM -0700, Ming Lin wrote:
From: Kent Overstreet kent.overstr...@gmail.com
As generic_make_request() is now able to handle arbitrarily sized bios,
it's no longer necessary for each individual block driver to define its
own -merge_bvec_fn() callback. Remove
-- All Branches --
Adam Crume adamcr...@gmail.com
2014-12-01 20:45:58 -0800 wip-doc-rbd-replay
Alfredo Deza ad...@redhat.com
2015-03-23 16:39:48 -0400 wip-11212
2015-03-25 10:10:43 -0400 wip-11065
Alfredo Deza alfredo.d...@inktank.com
2014-07-08 13:58:35
On 05/25/2015 05:38 AM, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Alex Elder el...@ieee.org wrote:
On 05/21/2015 07:35 AM, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
- return -ETIMEDOUT instead of -EIO in case of timeout
- wait_event_interruptible_timeout() returns time left until timeout
and since it
On Mon, 25 May 2015, Wang, Zhiqiang wrote:
Hi all,
I ran into a problem during the teuthology test of proxy write. It is like
this:
- Client sends 3 writes and a read on the same object to base tier
- Set up cache tiering
- Client retries ops and sends the 3 writes and 1 read to the
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Christoph Hellwig h...@lst.de wrote:
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 11:18:40AM -0700, Ming Lin wrote:
From: Kent Overstreet kent.overstr...@gmail.com
As generic_make_request() is now able to handle arbitrarily sized bios,
it's no longer necessary for each individual
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 06:02:30PM +0300, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
I'm not Alex, but yeah, we have all the clone/split machinery and so we
can handle a spanning case just fine. I think rbd_merge_bvec() exists
to make sure we don't have to do that unless it's really necessary -
like when a single
On 05/25/2015 10:02 AM, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Christoph Hellwig h...@lst.de wrote:
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 11:18:40AM -0700, Ming Lin wrote:
From: Kent Overstreet kent.overstr...@gmail.com
As generic_make_request() is now able to handle arbitrarily sized bios,
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Christoph Hellwig h...@lst.de wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 06:02:30PM +0300, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
I'm not Alex, but yeah, we have all the clone/split machinery and so we
can handle a spanning case just fine. I think rbd_merge_bvec() exists
to make sure we
On Mon, 25 May 2015, Wang, Zhiqiang wrote:
We have a bunch of teuthology tests which build cache pool on top of an
ec base pool, and do partial object write. This is ok with the current
cache tiering implementation. But with proxy write, this won't work. In
my testing, the error message is
OK, so the cache tier OSD checks if it's able to proxy the write op, if not,
then forces a promotion.
Btw, I don't find the supports_omap helps in the current master. Do you mean
the 'CEPH_OSD_COPY_GET_FLAG_NOTSUPP_OMAP' flag?
-Original Message-
From: Sage Weil
Thanks for reviewing. We will update and add reviewed-by after
the patch accepted, the follow-up discussion is at
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/4737
On 2015/5/22 8:55, Joao Eduardo Luis wrote:
As far as I can tell, this patch can be split in two different patches:
- add
Yes, we can do the force promotion check in init_op_flags, as we did before.
-Original Message-
From: Sage Weil [mailto:sw...@redhat.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 10:19 AM
To: Wang, Zhiqiang
Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RE: Cache pool on top of ec base pool teuthology test
Hi Loic,
We rebased our teuthology/ceph-qa-suite and retried the test toward LRC on
current master.
However, we unfortunately got the same result as before (timeout error).
[test conditions]
Target : Ceph-9.0.0-971-gd49d816
https://github.com/kawaguchi-s/teuthology
On Tue, 26 May 2015, Wang, Zhiqiang wrote:
OK, so the cache tier OSD checks if it's able to proxy the write op, if not,
then forces a promotion.
Btw, I don't find the supports_omap helps in the current master. Do you mean
the 'CEPH_OSD_COPY_GET_FLAG_NOTSUPP_OMAP' flag?
Yeah, that isn't
19 matches
Mail list logo
