From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Xiaopong Tran Subject: Re: [PATCH] make mkcephfs and init-ceph osd filesystem handling more flexible Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 10:01:46 +0800 Message-ID: <50246B8A.5070504@gmail.com> References: <1344526971-17035-1-git-send-email-danny.kukawka@bisect.de> <5023E96E.30209@sandia.gov> <5023ED56.9070102@bisect.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:56904 "EHLO mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758411Ab2HJCBu (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Aug 2012 22:01:50 -0400 Received: by pbbrr13 with SMTP id rr13so1867037pbb.19 for ; Thu, 09 Aug 2012 19:01:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Sage Weil Cc: Tommi Virtanen , Danny Kukawka , ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, Jim Schutt On 08/10/2012 09:53 AM, Sage Weil wrote: > On Thu, 9 Aug 2012, Tommi Virtanen wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Danny Kukawka wrote: >>> So you mean chef?! Will there be an alternative to simply setup a >>> cluster from console? >>> >>> We (SUSE) are already working on an own chef ceph cookbook. But from >>> what I've seen till now it's really hard and more laborious to initially >>> setup a cluster with chef than with mkcephfs. >> >> I've written about this on the mailing list several times. We see a >> lot of demand for Chef, but don't want to tie our hands -- Canonical >> is working on Juju Charms, and I would like to see a mkcephfs >> replacement that relies on just SSH connections from a workstation >> node. We've made an explicit effort to improve the product as a whole, >> and to make the Chef cookbook as thin as possible. >> >> For some reason, the threading is broken on the archive, but this is a >> fragment of the most recent thread that talked about this: >> >> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.ceph.devel/8263/focus=8265 > > I think the real question is whether the planned "mkcephfs 2.0" is going > to capture the equivalent functionality of being able to enumerate up > front which osds will exist and which disks/journals they will use, and to > bring them up. Assuming it will (IMHO it needs to), can we make that > compatible with the current way that mkcephfs is invoked (i.e., a > ceph.conf file and a few command line args)? Not everyone (and I daresay > probably a minority) of users will be using Chef/Juju/Puppet/whatever, > regardless of whether or not we feel that is the right way to do things > and try to push them in that direction. > > In any case, since the new osd hotplugging stuff isn't available now and > is probably still a sprint or two off, I think we should consider applying > this patch. We aren't recommending btrfs across the board, and cluster > bringup is currently painful on ext4/xfs/etc. And, Danny already did the > work. :) > > sage > -- +1. Rgds, Xiaopong