From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Josh Durgin Subject: Re: Ceph fs stability Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 10:24:38 -0700 Message-ID: <501AB7D6.3020508@inktank.com> References: <501AB499.1080706@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-qa0-f46.google.com ([209.85.216.46]:46996 "EHLO mail-qa0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754493Ab2HBRYn (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Aug 2012 13:24:43 -0400 Received: by qadb17 with SMTP id b17so3577677qad.19 for ; Thu, 02 Aug 2012 10:24:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <501AB499.1080706@gmail.com> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Niko! Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org On 08/02/2012 10:10 AM, Niko! wrote: > Hi! > > we are using ceph 0.48 on three nodes to provide rbd images for further > four kvm nodes (not kernel mapped) with no big issues and would mount > the ceph fs on the kvm nodes just to store xml virtual machine > definitions in order to have them immediately in the case an host > crashes (we are in multimds configuration). As ceph fs is not production > ready what are the possible problems? May the fs corrupt the rbd pool or > damages will be limited only to the data/metadata pools (acceptable for > us)? may the fs hang the entire cluster or kvm client nodes? > > Regards. > > Niko The fs won't corrupt other pools or make them inaccessible, but if you use the kernel client it could potentially lock up the node. If you really want the fs interface, you can limit the failure further by mounting with fuse instead of the kernel ceph module. Since you're just storing some some vm definitions, why not use rados objects directly, e.g. with rados get/put to retrieve and store them? Josh