So I've created a little plan on how to create a new profile and assign new S3 users to EC 8+3 pool. Idea is that all new s3 users are using a new pool, and old ones pool with EC 3+2 and data is intact. --- ceph osd erasure-code-profile set ec-83-profile k=8 m=3 crush-failure-domain=host ceph osd pool create rgw.buckets.ec-83.data 256 erasure ec-83-profile ceph osd pool application enable rgw.buckets.ec-83.data rgw radosgw-admin zonegroup placement add --placement-id=ec-83-placement radosgw-admin zone placement add \ --placement-id ec-83-placement \ --data-pool rgw.buckets.ec-83.data \ --index-pool default.rgw.buckets.index \ --data-extra-pool default.rgw.buckets.non-ec \ --placement-index-type 0 radosgw-admin period update --commit # restart rgw systemctl restart ceph-radosgw.target # verify the new placement radosgw-admin zone get | grep -A 20 "ec-83-placement" # for new s3 users, set the default placement radosgw-admin user create --uid=<user> --tenant=<tenant> --placement-id=ec-83-placement --- It seems to work on "test cluster", however I get an error on: [root@a8-mon1 ~]# radosgw-admin period update --commit cannot commit period: period does not have a master zone of a master zonegroup failed to commit period: (22) Invalid argument Do I actually need to run this command or is "rgw restart" enough? Any comments appriciated. Rok On Fri, Apr 3, 2026 at 12:42 PM Rok Jaklič via ceph-users < ceph-users@ceph.io> wrote:
Hi,
we expanded the cluster to 12 nodes with 28 osds, but we are still running on EC 3+2, since we started cluster with 6 nodes. We would like to change it to EC 6+3 or even EC 8+3? Is this reasonable or will 8+3 take too much CPU/network capacities? Should I use isa/isa-l instead of jerasure?
Can anyone share experience with 8+3?
Kind regards, Rok _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@ceph.io