We're happy to announce the fourth bugfix release in the Octopus series.
In addition to a security fix in RGW, this release brings a range of fixes
across all components. We recommend that all Octopus users upgrade to this
release. For a detailed release notes with links & changelog please
refer to the official blog entry at https://ceph.io/releases/v15-2-4-octopus-released
* CVE-2020-10753: rgw: sanitize newlines in s3 CORSConfiguration's ExposeHeader
(William Bowling, Adam Mohammed, Casey Bodley)
* Cephadm: There were a lot of small usability improvements and bug fixes:
* Grafana when deployed by Cephadm now binds to all network interfaces.
* `cephadm check-host` now prints all detected problems at once.
* Cephadm now calls `ceph dashboard set-grafana-api-ssl-verify false`
when generating an SSL certificate for Grafana.
* The Alertmanager is now correctly pointed to the Ceph Dashboard
* `cephadm adopt` now supports adopting an Alertmanager
* `ceph orch ps` now supports filtering by service name
* `ceph orch host ls` now marks hosts as offline, if they are not
* Cephadm can now deploy NFS Ganesha services. For example, to deploy NFS with
a service id of mynfs, that will use the RADOS pool nfs-ganesha and namespace
ceph orch apply nfs mynfs nfs-ganesha nfs-ns
* Cephadm: `ceph orch ls --export` now returns all service specifications in
yaml representation that is consumable by `ceph orch apply`. In addition,
the commands `orch ps` and `orch ls` now support `--format yaml` and
* Cephadm: `ceph orch apply osd` supports a `--preview` flag that prints a preview of
the OSD specification before deploying OSDs. This makes it possible to
verify that the specification is correct, before applying it.
* RGW: The `radosgw-admin` sub-commands dealing with orphans --
`radosgw-admin orphans find`, `radosgw-admin orphans finish`, and
`radosgw-admin orphans list-jobs` -- have been deprecated. They have
not been actively maintained and they store intermediate results on
the cluster, which could fill a nearly-full cluster. They have been
replaced by a tool, currently considered experimental,
* RBD: The name of the rbd pool object that is used to store
rbd trash purge schedule is changed from "rbd_trash_trash_purge_schedule"
to "rbd_trash_purge_schedule". Users that have already started using
`rbd trash purge schedule` functionality and have per pool or namespace
schedules configured should copy "rbd_trash_trash_purge_schedule"
object to "rbd_trash_purge_schedule" before the upgrade and remove
"rbd_trash_purge_schedule" using the following commands in every RBD
pool and namespace where a trash purge schedule was previously
rados -p <pool-name> [-N namespace] cp rbd_trash_trash_purge_schedule rbd_trash_purge_schedule
rados -p <pool-name> [-N namespace] rm rbd_trash_trash_purge_schedule
or use any other convenient way to restore the schedule after the
* Git at git://github.com/ceph/ceph.git
* Tarball at http://download.ceph.com/tarballs/ceph-14.2.10.tar.gz
* For packages, see http://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/install/get-packages/
* Release git sha1: 7447c15c6ff58d7fce91843b705a268a1917325c
Systems Administrator, RDU
I am trying to use CEPH dmclock to see how it works for QoS control.
Especially, I want to set “osd_op_queue” as “mclock_client” to config
different [r, w, l] for each client. The CEPH version I use is nautilus
I noticed that in "OSD CONFIG REFERENCE" section of CEPH documentation, it
states that "the mClock based ClientQueue (mclock_client) also incorporates
the client identifier in order to promote fairness between clients.", so I
believe librados can support per-client configurations right now. I wonder
how I can set up the CEPH configuration to config different (r, w, l) for
different clients using such “client identifier"? Thanks.
I am trying to use CEPH dmclock to see how it works for QoS control. Especially, I want to set “osd_op_queue” as “mclock_client” to config different [r, w, l] for each client. The CEPH version I use is nautilus 14.2.9.
I noticed that in "OSD CONFIG REFERENCE" section of CEPH documentation, it states that "the mClock based ClientQueue (mclock_client) also incorporates the client identifier in order to promote fairness between clients.", so I believe librados can support per-client configurations right now. I wonder how I can set up the CEPH configuration to config different (r, w, l) for different clients using such “client identifier"? Thanks.
I have a question about "ceph dashboard backend API tests" status
and its ceph-dashboard-pr-backend job. It appears to be completely
standalone which means that we are building everything twice for
each PR: once for "make check" and once for "ceph dashboard backend
API tests". The only difference between these builds is that for
"make check" WITH_SEASTAR=ON is added.
Can ceph-pull-requests job which is responsible for "make check"
be changed to run run-backend-api-tests.sh at the end and report
two statuses instead of one? That is:
- run make
- if successful, run ctest and report "make check" status
- if successful, run run-backend-api-tests.sh and report "ceph
dashboard backend API tests" status
having a development environment that makes use of containers has at
least two benefits compared to plain vstart etc.:
* deploying miscellaneous on demand services is easier (e.g. monitoring
* Using containers makes the development environment more similar to
future production environments.
Turns out, we (as the developer community) already have plenty of
different approaches for this problem:
# We have two similar dashboard projects
They're based on docker-compose and in addition to starting the core
services, they also can deploy a monitoring stack. They differ in the
detail that ceph-dev exclusively uses containers and ceph-dev-docker
uses vstart for the core services.
Similar to ceph-dev, but uses `cephadm bootstrap` to setup the cluster.
It builds a container image containing binaries from build/bin
Which is ceph-ansible based.
# vstart --cephadm
Which is similar to https://github.com/ricardoasmarques/ceph-dev-docker
but uses cephadm to deploy additional services instead of docker-compose.
# cephadm bootstrap --shared_ceph_folder
Deploys a pure cephadm based cluster, but mounts different folders
My questions are now:
* Is this list complete or did I miss anything?
* Are there use cases which are not possible right now?
* As we have a lot of similar solutions here. Is there a possibility to
reduce the maintenance overhead somehow?
and we have plenty of them.
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
(HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg). Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer