[ceph-users] Ceph cache pool full

Shawfeng Dong shaw at ucsc.edu
Fri Oct 6 09:39:34 PDT 2017


Hi Christian,

I set those via CLI:
# ceph osd pool set cephfs_cache target_max_bytes 1099511627776
# ceph osd pool set cephfs_cache target_max_objects 1000000

but manual flushing doesn't appear to work:
# rados -p cephfs_cache cache-flush-evict-all
        1000000046a.00000ca6

it just gets stuck there for a long time.

Any suggestion? Do I need to restart the daemons or reboot the nodes?

Thanks,
Shaw



On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Christian Balzer <chibi at gol.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 6 Oct 2017 09:14:40 -0700 Shawfeng Dong wrote:
>
> > I found the command: rados -p cephfs_cache cache-flush-evict-all
> >
> That's not what you want/need.
> Though it will fix your current "full" issue.
>
> > The documentation (
> > http://docs.ceph.com/docs/luminous/rados/operations/cache-tiering/) has
> > been improved a lot since I last checked it a few weeks ago!
> >
> The need to set max_bytes and max_objects has been documented for ages
> (since Hammer).
>
> more below...
>
> > -Shaw
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Shawfeng Dong <shaw at ucsc.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks, Luis.
> > >
> > > I've just set max_bytes and max_objects:
> How?
> Editing the conf file won't help until a restart.
>
> > > target_max_objects: 1000000 (1M)
> > > target_max_bytes: 1099511627776 (1TB)
> >
> I'd lower that or the cache_target_full_ratio by another 10%.
>
> Christian
> > >
> > > but nothing appears to be happening. Is there a way to force flushing?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Shaw
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 8:55 AM, Luis Periquito <periquito at gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Not looking at anything else, you didn't set the max_bytes or
> > >> max_objects for it to start flushing...
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 4:49 PM, Shawfeng Dong <shaw at ucsc.edu> wrote:
> > >> > Dear all,
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks a lot for the very insightful comments/suggestions!
> > >> >
> > >> > There are 3 OSD servers in our pilot Ceph cluster, each with 2x 1TB
> SSDs
> > >> > (boot disks), 12x 8TB SATA HDDs and 2x 1.2TB NVMe SSDs. We use the
> > >> bluestore
> > >> > backend, with the first NVMe as the WAL and DB devices for OSDs on
> the
> > >> HDDs.
> > >> > And we try to create a cache tier out of the second NVMes.
> > >> >
> > >> > Here are the outputs of the commands suggested by David:
> > >> >
> > >> > 1) # ceph df
> > >> > GLOBAL:
> > >> >     SIZE     AVAIL     RAW USED     %RAW USED
> > >> >     265T      262T        2847G          1.05
> > >> > POOLS:
> > >> >     NAME                ID     USED      %USED      MAX AVAIL
> > >>  OBJECTS
> > >> >     cephfs_data         1          0          0          248T
> > >>  0
> > >> >     cephfs_metadata     2      8515k          0          248T
> > >> 24
> > >> >     cephfs_cache        3      1381G     100.00             0
> > >> 355385
> > >> >
> > >> > 2) # ceph osd df
> > >> >  0   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2076M  7450G  0.03  0.03 174
> > >> >  1   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 169
> > >> >  2   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 173
> > >> >  3   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 159
> > >> >  4   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 173
> > >> >  5   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 162
> > >> >  6   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 149
> > >> >  7   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 179
> > >> >  8   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2076M  7450G  0.03  0.03 163
> > >> >  9   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 194
> > >> > 10   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 185
> > >> > 11   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 168
> > >> > 36  nvme 1.09149  1.00000 1117G  855G   262G 76.53 73.01  79
> > >> > 12   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 180
> > >> > 13   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 168
> > >> > 14   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 178
> > >> > 15   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 170
> > >> > 16   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 149
> > >> > 17   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 203
> > >> > 18   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 173
> > >> > 19   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2076M  7450G  0.03  0.03 158
> > >> > 20   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 154
> > >> > 21   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 160
> > >> > 22   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 167
> > >> > 23   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2076M  7450G  0.03  0.03 188
> > >> > 37  nvme 1.09149  1.00000 1117G 1061G 57214M 95.00 90.63  98
> > >> > 24   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 187
> > >> > 25   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 200
> > >> > 26   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 147
> > >> > 27   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 171
> > >> > 28   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 162
> > >> > 29   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 152
> > >> > 30   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 174
> > >> > 31   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 176
> > >> > 32   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 182
> > >> > 33   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2072M  7450G  0.03  0.03 155
> > >> > 34   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2076M  7450G  0.03  0.03 166
> > >> > 35   hdd 7.27829  1.00000 7452G 2076M  7450G  0.03  0.03 176
> > >> > 38  nvme 1.09149  1.00000 1117G  857G   260G 76.71 73.18  79
> > >> >                     TOTAL  265T 2847G   262T  1.05
> > >> > MIN/MAX VAR: 0.03/90.63  STDDEV: 22.81
> > >> >
> > >> > 3) # ceph osd tree
> > >> > -1       265.29291 root default
> > >> > -3        88.43097     host pulpo-osd01
> > >> >  0   hdd   7.27829         osd.0            up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> >  1   hdd   7.27829         osd.1            up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> >  2   hdd   7.27829         osd.2            up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> >  3   hdd   7.27829         osd.3            up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> >  4   hdd   7.27829         osd.4            up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> >  5   hdd   7.27829         osd.5            up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> >  6   hdd   7.27829         osd.6            up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> >  7   hdd   7.27829         osd.7            up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> >  8   hdd   7.27829         osd.8            up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> >  9   hdd   7.27829         osd.9            up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 10   hdd   7.27829         osd.10           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 11   hdd   7.27829         osd.11           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 36  nvme   1.09149         osd.36           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > -5        88.43097     host pulpo-osd02
> > >> > 12   hdd   7.27829         osd.12           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 13   hdd   7.27829         osd.13           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 14   hdd   7.27829         osd.14           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 15   hdd   7.27829         osd.15           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 16   hdd   7.27829         osd.16           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 17   hdd   7.27829         osd.17           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 18   hdd   7.27829         osd.18           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 19   hdd   7.27829         osd.19           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 20   hdd   7.27829         osd.20           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 21   hdd   7.27829         osd.21           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 22   hdd   7.27829         osd.22           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 23   hdd   7.27829         osd.23           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 37  nvme   1.09149         osd.37           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 36  nvme   1.09149         osd.36           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > -5        88.43097     host pulpo-osd02
> > >> > 12   hdd   7.27829         osd.12           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 13   hdd   7.27829         osd.13           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 14   hdd   7.27829         osd.14           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 15   hdd   7.27829         osd.15           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 16   hdd   7.27829         osd.16           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 17   hdd   7.27829         osd.17           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 18   hdd   7.27829         osd.18           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 19   hdd   7.27829         osd.19           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 20   hdd   7.27829         osd.20           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 21   hdd   7.27829         osd.21           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 22   hdd   7.27829         osd.22           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 23   hdd   7.27829         osd.23           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 37  nvme   1.09149         osd.37           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > -7        88.43097     host pulpo-osd03
> > >> > 24   hdd   7.27829         osd.24           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 25   hdd   7.27829         osd.25           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 26   hdd   7.27829         osd.26           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 27   hdd   7.27829         osd.27           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 28   hdd   7.27829         osd.28           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 29   hdd   7.27829         osd.29           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 30   hdd   7.27829         osd.30           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 31   hdd   7.27829         osd.31           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 32   hdd   7.27829         osd.32           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 33   hdd   7.27829         osd.33           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 34   hdd   7.27829         osd.34           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 35   hdd   7.27829         osd.35           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> > 38  nvme   1.09149         osd.38           up  1.00000 1.00000
> > >> >
> > >> > 4) # ceph osd pool get cephfs_cache all
> > >> > min_size: 2
> > >> > crash_replay_interval: 0
> > >> > pg_num: 128
> > >> > pgp_num: 128
> > >> > crush_rule: pulpo_nvme
> > >> > hashpspool: true
> > >> > nodelete: false
> > >> > nopgchange: false
> > >> > nosizechange: false
> > >> > write_fadvise_dontneed: false
> > >> > noscrub: false
> > >> > nodeep-scrub: false
> > >> > hit_set_type: bloom
> > >> > hit_set_period: 14400
> > >> > hit_set_count: 12
> > >> > hit_set_fpp: 0.05
> > >> > use_gmt_hitset: 1
> > >> > auid: 0
> > >> > target_max_objects: 0
> > >> > target_max_bytes: 0
> > >> > cache_target_dirty_ratio: 0.4
> > >> > cache_target_dirty_high_ratio: 0.6
> > >> > cache_target_full_ratio: 0.8
> > >> > cache_min_flush_age: 0
> > >> > cache_min_evict_age: 0
> > >> > min_read_recency_for_promote: 0
> > >> > min_write_recency_for_promote: 0
> > >> > fast_read: 0
> > >> > hit_set_grade_decay_rate: 0
> > >> > crash_replay_interval: 0
> > >> >
> > >> > Do you see anything wrong? We had written some small files to the
> CephFS
> > >> > before we tried to write the big 1TB file. What is puzzling to me is
> > >> that no
> > >> > data has been written back to the data pool.
> > >> >
> > >> > Best,
> > >> > Shaw
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 6:46 AM, David Turner <drakonstein at gmail.com
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Fri, Oct 6, 2017, 1:05 AM Christian Balzer <chibi at gol.com>
> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Hello,
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Fri, 06 Oct 2017 03:30:41 +0000 David Turner wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> > You're missing most all of the important bits. What the osds in
> your
> > >> >>> > cluster look like, your tree, and your cache pool settings.
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> > ceph df
> > >> >>> > ceph osd df
> > >> >>> > ceph osd tree
> > >> >>> > ceph osd pool get cephfs_cache all
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> Especially the last one.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> My money is on not having set target_max_objects and
> target_max_bytes
> > >> to
> > >> >>> sensible values along with the ratios.
> > >> >>> In short, not having read the (albeit spotty) documentation.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> > You have your writeback cache on 3 nvme drives. It looks like
> you
> > >> have
> > >> >>> > 1.6TB available between them for the cache. I don't know the
> > >> behavior
> > >> >>> > of a
> > >> >>> > writeback cache tier on cephfs for large files, but I would
> guess
> > >> that
> > >> >>> > it
> > >> >>> > can only hold full files and not flush partial files.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I VERY much doubt that, if so it would be a massive flaw.
> > >> >>> One assumes that cache operations work on the RADOS object level,
> no
> > >> >>> matter what.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I hope that it is on the rados level, but not a single object had
> been
> > >> >> flushed to the backing pool. So I hazarded a guess. Seeing his
> > >> settings will
> > >> >> shed more light.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> > That would mean your
> > >> >>> > cache needs to have enough space for any file being written to
> the
> > >> >>> > cluster.
> > >> >>> > In this case a 1.3TB file with 3x replication would require
> 3.9TB
> > >> (more
> > >> >>> > than double what you have available) of available space in your
> > >> >>> > writeback
> > >> >>> > cache.
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> > There are very few use cases that benefit from a cache tier. The
> > >> docs
> > >> >>> > for
> > >> >>> > Luminous warn as much.
> > >> >>> You keep repeating that like a broken record.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> And while certainly not false I for one wouldn't be able to use
> > >> (justify
> > >> >>> using) Ceph w/o cache tiers in our main use case.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> In this case I assume they were following and old cheat sheet or
> such,
> > >> >>> suggesting the previously required cache tier with EC pools.
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> http://docs.ceph.com/docs/luminous/rados/operations/cache-tiering/
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I know I keep repeating it, especially recently as there have been
> a
> > >> lot
> > >> >> of people asking about it. The Luminous docs added a large section
> > >> about how
> > >> >> it is probably not what you want. Like me, it is not saying that
> there
> > >> are
> > >> >> no use cases for it. There was no information provided about the
> use
> > >> case
> > >> >> and I made some suggestions/guesses. I'm also guessing that they
> are
> > >> >> following a guide where a writeback cache was necessary for CephFS
> to
> > >> use EC
> > >> >> prior to Luminous. I also usually add that people should test it
> out
> > >> and
> > >> >> find what works best for them. I will always defer to your
> practical
> > >> use of
> > >> >> cache tiers as well, especially when using rbds.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I manage a cluster that I intend to continue running a writeback
> cache
> > >> in
> > >> >> front of CephFS on the same drives as the EC pool. The use case
> > >> receives a
> > >> >> good enough benefit from the cache tier that it isn't even
> required to
> > >> use
> > >> >> flash media to see it. It is used for video editing and the files
> are
> > >> >> usually modified and read within the first 24 hours and then left
> in
> > >> cold
> > >> >> storage until deleted. I have the cache timed to keep everything
> in it
> > >> for
> > >> >> 24 hours and then evict it by using a minimum time to flush and
> evict
> > >> at 24
> > >> >> hours and a target max bytes of 0. All files are in there for that
> > >> time and
> > >> >> then it never has to decide what to keep as it doesn't keep
> anything
> > >> longer
> > >> >> than that. Luckily read performance from cold storage is not a
> > >> requirement
> > >> >> of this cluster as any read operation has to first read it from EC
> > >> storage,
> > >> >> write it to replica storage, and then read it from replica
> storage...
> > >> Yuck.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Christian
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> >What is your goal by implementing this cache? If the
> > >> >>> > answer is to utilize extra space on the nvmes, then just remove
> it
> > >> and
> > >> >>> > say
> > >> >>> > thank you. The better use of nvmes in that case are as a part
> of the
> > >> >>> > bluestore stack and give your osds larger DB partitions. Keeping
> > >> your
> > >> >>> > metadata pool on nvmes is still a good idea.
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> > On Thu, Oct 5, 2017, 7:45 PM Shawfeng Dong <shaw at ucsc.edu>
> wrote:
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> > > Dear all,
> > >> >>> > >
> > >> >>> > > We just set up a Ceph cluster, running the latest stable
> release
> > >> Ceph
> > >> >>> > > v12.2.0 (Luminous):
> > >> >>> > > # ceph --version
> > >> >>> > > ceph version 12.2.0 (32ce2a3ae5239ee33d6150705cdb24
> d43bab910c)
> > >> >>> > > luminous
> > >> >>> > > (rc)
> > >> >>> > >
> > >> >>> > > The goal is to serve Ceph filesystem, for which we created 3
> > >> pools:
> > >> >>> > > # ceph osd lspools
> > >> >>> > > 1 cephfs_data,2 cephfs_metadata,3 cephfs_cache,
> > >> >>> > > where
> > >> >>> > > * cephfs_data is the data pool (36 OSDs on HDDs), which is
> > >> >>> > > erased-coded;
> > >> >>> > > * cephfs_metadata is the metadata pool
> > >> >>> > > * cephfs_cache is the cache tier (3 OSDs on NVMes) for
> > >> cephfs_data.
> > >> >>> > > The
> > >> >>> > > cache-mode is writeback.
> > >> >>> > >
> > >> >>> > > Everything had worked fine, until today when we tried to copy
> a
> > >> 1.3TB
> > >> >>> > > file
> > >> >>> > > to the CephFS.  We got the "No space left on device" error!
> > >> >>> > >
> > >> >>> > > 'ceph -s' says some OSDs are full:
> > >> >>> > > # ceph -s
> > >> >>> > >   cluster:
> > >> >>> > >     id:     e18516bf-39cb-4670-9f13-88ccb7d19769
> > >> >>> > >     health: HEALTH_ERR
> > >> >>> > >             full flag(s) set
> > >> >>> > >             1 full osd(s)
> > >> >>> > >             1 pools have many more objects per pg than average
> > >> >>> > >
> > >> >>> > >   services:
> > >> >>> > >     mon: 3 daemons, quorum pulpo-admin,pulpo-mon01,pulpo-
> mds01
> > >> >>> > >     mgr: pulpo-mds01(active), standbys: pulpo-admin,
> pulpo-mon01
> > >> >>> > >     mds: pulpos-1/1/1 up  {0=pulpo-mds01=up:active}
> > >> >>> > >     osd: 39 osds: 39 up, 39 in
> > >> >>> > >          flags full
> > >> >>> > >
> > >> >>> > >   data:
> > >> >>> > >     pools:   3 pools, 2176 pgs
> > >> >>> > >     objects: 347k objects, 1381 GB
> > >> >>> > >     usage:   2847 GB used, 262 TB / 265 TB avail
> > >> >>> > >     pgs:     2176 active+clean
> > >> >>> > >
> > >> >>> > >   io:
> > >> >>> > >     client:   19301 kB/s rd, 2935 op/s rd, 0 op/s wr
> > >> >>> > >
> > >> >>> > > And indeed the cache pool is full:
> > >> >>> > > # rados df
> > >> >>> > > POOL_NAME       USED  OBJECTS CLONES COPIES MISSING_ON_PRIMARY
> > >> >>> > > UNFOUND
> > >> >>> > > DEGRADED RD_OPS   RD
> > >> >>> > >     WR_OPS  WR
> > >> >>> > > cephfs_cache    1381G  355385      0 710770                  0
> > >> >>> > > 0
> > >> >>> > >     0 10004954 15
> > >> >>> > > 22G 1398063  1611G
> > >> >>> > > cephfs_data         0       0      0      0                  0
> > >> >>> > > 0
> > >> >>> > >     0        0
> > >> >>> > >   0       0      0
> > >> >>> > > cephfs_metadata 8515k      24      0     72                  0
> > >> >>> > > 0
> > >> >>> > >     0        3  3
> > >> >>> > > 072    3953 10541k
> > >> >>> > >
> > >> >>> > > total_objects    355409
> > >> >>> > > total_used       2847G
> > >> >>> > > total_avail      262T
> > >> >>> > > total_space      265T
> > >> >>> > >
> > >> >>> > > However, the data pool is completely empty! So it seems that
> data
> > >> has
> > >> >>> > > only
> > >> >>> > > been written to the cache pool, but not written back to the
> data
> > >> >>> > > pool.
> > >> >>> > >
> > >> >>> > > I am really at a loss whether this is due to a setup error on
> my
> > >> >>> > > part, or
> > >> >>> > > a Luminous bug. Could anyone shed some light on this? Please
> let
> > >> me
> > >> >>> > > know if
> > >> >>> > > you need any further info.
> > >> >>> > >
> > >> >>> > > Best,
> > >> >>> > > Shaw
> > >> >>> > > _______________________________________________
> > >> >>> > > ceph-users mailing list
> > >> >>> > > ceph-users at lists.ceph.com
> > >> >>> > > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> > >> >>> > >
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> --
> > >> >>> Christian Balzer        Network/Systems Engineer
> > >> >>> chibi at gol.com           Rakuten Communications
> > >> >>> _______________________________________________
> > >> >>> ceph-users mailing list
> > >> >>> ceph-users at lists.ceph.com
> > >> >>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> _______________________________________________
> > >> >> ceph-users mailing list
> > >> >> ceph-users at lists.ceph.com
> > >> >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > _______________________________________________
> > >> > ceph-users mailing list
> > >> > ceph-users at lists.ceph.com
> > >> > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
>
>
> --
> Christian Balzer        Network/Systems Engineer
> chibi at gol.com           Rakuten Communications
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/attachments/20171006/00255224/attachment.html>


More information about the ceph-users mailing list