>
>> For cephfs, the size reported by 'ls -s' is the same as file size. see
>> http://ceph.com/docs/next/dev/differences-from-posix/
>
> ...but the files are still in fact stored sparsely. It's just hard to
> tell.
perfect - thanks!
/jc
___
ceph-use
> For cephfs, the size reported by 'ls -s' is the same as file size. see
> http://ceph.com/docs/next/dev/differences-from-posix/
ah! So if I understand correctly, the files are indeed sparse on CephFS?
thanks
/jc
___
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@
On Mon, 16 Sep 2013, Yan, Zheng wrote:
> For cephfs, the size reported by 'ls -s' is the same as file size. see
> http://ceph.com/docs/next/dev/differences-from-posix/
...but the files are still in fact stored sparsely. It's just hard to
tell.
sage
>
> Regards
> Yan, Zheng
>
>
> On Mon, S
For cephfs, the size reported by 'ls -s' is the same as file size. see
http://ceph.com/docs/next/dev/differences-from-posix/
Regards
Yan, Zheng
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Jens-Christian Fischer
wrote:
>
> Hi all
>
> as part of moving our OpenStack VM instance store from dedicated disks on
Hi all
as part of moving our OpenStack VM instance store from dedicated disks on the
physical hosts to a CephFS backed by an SSD pool, we noticed that the files
created on CephFS aren't sparse, even though the original files were.
This is on
root@s2:~# ls -lhs /var/lib/nova/instances/_base
tot
