On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 02:29:44PM +0100, Christian Brunner wrote:
> 2011/10/31 Christian Brunner :
> > 2011/10/31 Christian Brunner :
> >> 2011/10/31 Christian Brunner :
> >>>
> >>> The patch didn't hurt, but I've to tell you that I'm still seeing the
> >>> same old problems. Load is going up agai
2011/10/31 Christian Brunner :
> 2011/10/31 Christian Brunner :
>> 2011/10/31 Christian Brunner :
>>>
>>> The patch didn't hurt, but I've to tell you that I'm still seeing the
>>> same old problems. Load is going up again:
>>>
>>> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
2011/10/31 Christian Brunner :
> 2011/10/31 Christian Brunner :
>>
>> The patch didn't hurt, but I've to tell you that I'm still seeing the
>> same old problems. Load is going up again:
>>
>> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
>> 5502 root 20 0 0 0
2011/10/27 Josef Bacik :
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 01:56:48PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
>> 2011/10/24 Josef Bacik :
>> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
>> >> [adding linux-btrfs to cc]
>> >>
>> >> Josef, Chris, any ideas on the below issues?
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, 24
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 01:56:48PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
> 2011/10/24 Josef Bacik :
> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
> >> [adding linux-btrfs to cc]
> >>
> >> Josef, Chris, any ideas on the below issues?
> >>
> >> On Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Christian Brunner wrote:
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 11:07:38AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 09:23:54AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:22:48PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:15:45PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 11:05:12AM
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 09:23:54AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:22:48PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:15:45PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 11:05:12AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:25:02PM
Majer
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Martin Mailand wrote:
Hi
resend without the perf attachment, which could be found here:
http://tuxadero.com/multistorage/perf.report.txt.bz2
Best Regards,
martin
Original-Nachricht
Betreff: Re: ceph on btrfs [was Re: ceph on non-btrfs
ut the perf attachment, which could be found here:
> http://tuxadero.com/multistorage/perf.report.txt.bz2
>
> Best Regards,
> martin
>
> Original-Nachricht ----
> Betreff: Re: ceph on btrfs [was Re: ceph on non-btrfs file systems]
> Datum: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 22:38:
Hi
resend without the perf attachment, which could be found here:
http://tuxadero.com/multistorage/perf.report.txt.bz2
Best Regards,
martin
Original-Nachricht
Betreff: Re: ceph on btrfs [was Re: ceph on non-btrfs file systems]
Datum: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 22:38:47 +0200
Von
On Wed, 26 Oct 2011, Christian Brunner wrote:
> 2011/10/26 Sage Weil :
> > On Wed, 26 Oct 2011, Christian Brunner wrote:
> >> >> > Christian, have you tweaked those settings in your ceph.conf? It
> >> >> > would be
> >> >> > something like 'journal dio = false'. If not, can you verify that
> >>
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:22:48PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:15:45PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 11:05:12AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:25:02PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Attached is a perf-r
2011/10/26 Christian Brunner :
> 2011/10/25 Josef Bacik :
>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:15:45PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 11:05:12AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
>>> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:25:02PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Attached is a perf-repo
2011/10/26 Sage Weil :
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2011, Christian Brunner wrote:
>> >> > Christian, have you tweaked those settings in your ceph.conf? It would
>> >> > be
>> >> > something like 'journal dio = false'. If not, can you verify that
>> >> > directio shows true when the journal is initialized f
2011/10/25 Josef Bacik :
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:15:45PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 11:05:12AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
>> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:25:02PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Attached is a perf-report. I have included the whole report,
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011, Christian Brunner wrote:
> 2011/10/25 Sage Weil :
> > On Tue, 25 Oct 2011, Josef Bacik wrote:
> >> At this point it seems like the biggest problem with latency in ceph-osd
> >> is not related to btrfs, the latency seems to all be from the fact that
> >> ceph-osd is fsyncing a b
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:15:45PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 11:05:12AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:25:02PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
> > >
> > > Attached is a perf-report. I have included the whole report, so that
> > > you can see the
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 11:05:12AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:25:02PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
> >
> > Attached is a perf-report. I have included the whole report, so that
> > you can see the difference between the good and the bad
> > btrfs-endio-wri.
> >
>
> W
2011/10/25 Sage Weil :
> On Tue, 25 Oct 2011, Josef Bacik wrote:
>> At this point it seems like the biggest problem with latency in ceph-osd
>> is not related to btrfs, the latency seems to all be from the fact that
>> ceph-osd is fsyncing a block dev for whatever reason.
>
> There is one place whe
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011, Josef Bacik wrote:
> At this point it seems like the biggest problem with latency in ceph-osd
> is not related to btrfs, the latency seems to all be from the fact that
> ceph-osd is fsyncing a block dev for whatever reason.
There is one place where we sync_file_range() on t
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
> > > - When I run ceph with btrfs snaps disabled, the situation is getting
> > > slightly better. I can run an OSD for about 3 days without problems,
> > > but then again the load increases.
2011/10/25 Josef Bacik :
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:25:02PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
>> 2011/10/25 Josef Bacik :
>> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 01:56:48PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
[...]
>> >>
>> >> In our Ceph-OSD server we have 4 disks with 4 btrfs filesystems. Ceph
>> >> tries to ba
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:25:02PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
> 2011/10/25 Josef Bacik :
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 01:56:48PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
> >> 2011/10/24 Josef Bacik :
> >> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
> >> >> [adding linux-btrfs to cc]
> >
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 04:25:02PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
> 2011/10/25 Josef Bacik :
> > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 01:56:48PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
> >> 2011/10/24 Josef Bacik :
> >> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
> >> >> [adding linux-btrfs to cc]
> >
2011/10/25 Josef Bacik :
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 01:56:48PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
>> 2011/10/24 Josef Bacik :
>> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
>> >> [adding linux-btrfs to cc]
>> >>
>> >> Josef, Chris, any ideas on the below issues?
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, 24
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 01:56:48PM +0200, Christian Brunner wrote:
> 2011/10/24 Josef Bacik :
> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
> >> [adding linux-btrfs to cc]
> >>
> >> Josef, Chris, any ideas on the below issues?
> >>
> >> On Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Christian Brunner wrote:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
> > - When I run ceph with btrfs snaps disabled, the situation is getting
> > slightly better. I can run an OSD for about 3 days without problems,
> > but then again the load increases. This time, I can see that the
> > ceph-osd (blkdev_iss
On 24.10.2011 23:34, Christian Brunner wrote:
2011/10/24 Chris Mason:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 03:51:47PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
[adding linux-btrfs to cc]
Josef, Chris, any ideas on the below issues?
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Christian
2011/10/24 Chris Mason :
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 03:51:47PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
>> > [adding linux-btrfs to cc]
>> >
>> > Josef, Chris, any ideas on the below issues?
>> >
>> > On Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Christian Brunner wrote:
>> > >
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 03:51:47PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
> > [adding linux-btrfs to cc]
> >
> > Josef, Chris, any ideas on the below issues?
> >
> > On Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Christian Brunner wrote:
> > > Thanks for explaining this. I d
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:06:49AM -0700, Sage Weil wrote:
> [adding linux-btrfs to cc]
>
> Josef, Chris, any ideas on the below issues?
>
> On Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Christian Brunner wrote:
> > Thanks for explaining this. I don't have any objections against btrfs
> > as a osd filesystem. Even the fa
[adding linux-btrfs to cc]
Josef, Chris, any ideas on the below issues?
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Christian Brunner wrote:
> Thanks for explaining this. I don't have any objections against btrfs
> as a osd filesystem. Even the fact that there is no btrfs-fsck doesn't
> scare me, since I can use the ce
32 matches
Mail list logo
