[ceph-users] mount cephfs on ceph servers

Daniele Riccucci devster at posteo.net
Wed Mar 6 15:18:07 PST 2019


Hello,
is the deadlock risk still an issue in containerized deployments? For 
example with OSD daemons in containers and mounting the filesystem on 
the host machine?
Thank you.

Daniele

On 06/03/19 16:40, Jake Grimmett wrote:
> Just to add "+1" on this datapoint, based on one month usage on Mimic
> 13.2.4 essentially "it works great for us"
> 
> Prior to this, we had issues with the kernel driver on 12.2.2. This
> could have been due to limited RAM on the osd nodes (128GB / 45 OSD),
> and an older kernel.
> 
> Upgrading the RAM to 256GB and using a RHEL 7.6 derived kernel has
> allowed us to reliably use the kernel driver.
> 
> We keep 30 snapshots ( one per day), have one active metadata server,
> and change several TB daily - it's much, *much* faster than with fuse.
> 
> Cluster has 10 OSD nodes, currently storing 2PB, using ec 8:2 coding.
> 
> ta ta
> 
> Jake
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 3/6/19 11:10 AM, Hector Martin wrote:
>> On 06/03/2019 12:07, Zhenshi Zhou wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I'm gonna mount cephfs from my ceph servers for some reason,
>>> including monitors, metadata servers and osd servers. I know it's
>>> not a best practice. But what is the exact potential danger if I mount
>>> cephfs from its own server?
>>
>> As a datapoint, I have been doing this on two machines (single-host Ceph
>> clusters) for months with no ill effects. The FUSE client performs a lot
>> worse than the kernel client, so I switched to the latter, and it's been
>> working well with no deadlocks.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> ceph-users at lists.ceph.com
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> 


More information about the ceph-users mailing list