distro testing for reef
* https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/49443 adds centos9 and ubuntu22 to
supported distros
* centos9 blocked by teuthology bug https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/58491
- lsb_release command no longer exists, use /etc/os-release instead
- ceph stopped depending on lsb_release in 2021 with
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/42770
* ubuntu22 not blocked by teuthology, but the new python version
breaks most of the rgw tests
can we drop centos8 or ubuntu20 support for reef?
* we usually support the latest centos and two ubuntu LTSs
* users need an upgrade path that doesn't require OS and ceph upgrade
at the same time
* we might be able to drop centos8 support for Reef by adding centos9
support to Quincy
* python versioning issues make longer-term support of older distros
problematic. related work:
- https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/41979
- https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/47501
ondisk format changes in minor releases
* https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/48915 introduced some BlueFS log
changes in 16.2.11 which makes it incompatible with previous Pacific
releases. Hence no downgrade is permitted any more.
- doc text tracked in https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/58625
* how do we prevent these issues in the future?
- better testing of mixed-version rgw/mds/mgr/etc
infrastructure update
* a planned network outage yesterday still affecting LRC
Hi Ceph Developers and Users,
Various upstream developers and I are working on adding labels to perf
counters (https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/48657).
We would like to understand the ramifications of changing the format of the
json dumped by the `perf dump` command for the Reef Release on users and
components of Ceph.
As an example given in the PR, currently unlabeled counters are dumped like
this in comparison with their new labeled counterparts.
"some unlabeled_counter": {
"put_b": 1048576,
},
"some labeled_counter": {
"labels": {
"Bucket: "bkt1",
"User: "user1",
},
"counters": {
"put_b": 1048576,
},
},
Here is an example given in the PR of the old style unlabeled counters
being dumped in the same format as the labeled counters:
"some unlabeled": {
"labels": {
},
"counters": {
"put_b": 1048576,
},
},
"some labeled": {
"labels": {
"Bucket: "bkt1",
"User: "user1",
},
"counters": {
"put_b": 1048576,
},
},
Would users/consumers of these counters be opposed to changing the format?
Why is this the case?
As far as I know there are ceph-mgr modules related to Prometheus and
telemetry that are consuming the current unlabeled counters. Also this
topic will be discussed at the upcoming Ceph Developer Monthly EMEA as well.
Best,
Ali
This is an email thread for reporting documentation concerns.
I won't guarantee that our documentation team will drop everything and
immediately service your documentation request, but I do guarantee that
your request will go into the queue of things we will eventually tackle.
https://docs.ceph.com
Zac Dover
Upstream Documentation
Ceph Foundation
