From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christopher Kunz Subject: Re: Best practice with 0.48.2 to take a node into maintenance Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 11:35:03 +0100 Message-ID: <50BDD1D7.3030904@de-punkt.de> References: <0F892E7E-CF04-49A2-9ABA-5EAF25E6D645@filoo.de> <50BCFA2F.9070603@inktank.com> <50BD0243.2050109@de-punkt.de> <50BD0E16.8090901@catalyst.net.nz> <50BD10A1.5020904@smart-weblications.de> <50BD12CB.3030506@catalyst.net.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-6.de-punkt.de ([93.190.64.36]:47332 "EHLO mail-6.de-punkt.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751388Ab2LDKfA (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:35:00 -0500 In-Reply-To: <50BD12CB.3030506@catalyst.net.nz> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org" Hey, > That has to be old information - we're using it in anger on 64 bit x86 > machines, from both Intel > and AMD. I have no idea about ARM etc, however. just to make absolutely sure: Are you using kexec "in anger" to switch Ceph nodes to new kernels? I'm very doubtful that the approach will work seamlessly with Ceph, as it is rather picky regarding kernel state... Regards, --ck