From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Josh Durgin Subject: Re: MAX_RBD_IMAGES Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 15:42:29 -0700 Message-ID: <5601D955.7020701@redhat.com> References: <866247178.20201562.1442958933148.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:40228 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933730AbbIVWlx (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2015 18:41:53 -0400 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 619558E70A for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 22:41:53 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <866247178.20201562.1442958933148.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Shinobu Kinjo , ceph-devel On 09/22/2015 02:55 PM, Shinobu Kinjo wrote: > Hello, > > Does any of you know why *MAX_RBD_IMAGES* was changed from 16 to 128? > I hope that Dan remember -; > > http://resources.ustack.com/ceph/ceph/commit/2a6dcabf7f1b7550a0fa4fd223970ffc24ad7870 I don't think there's a reason for the exact limit. rbd-fuse was created as a prototype, and hasn't had much work on it since. A hardcoded limit on open images is not necessary, for example. Some more ideas for improvements if anyone's interested: http://pad.ceph.com/p/rbd-fuse-2015 Josh