July 2021 - Dev - lists.ceph.io

by Patrick Donnelly

For developers submitting jobs using teuthology, we now have recommendations on what priority level to use: https://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/dev/developer_guide/#testing-priority -- Patrick Donnelly, Ph.D. He / Him / His Senior Software Engineer Red Hat Sunnyvale, CA GPG: 19F28A586F808C2402351B93C3301A3E258DD79D

2 months, 1 week

5
7
0 0

Seeking help regarding setting up debugger with ceph

by Surabhi GUPTA

Hi, I created a test ceph cluster of 3 nodes on a single host (following the readme in https://github.com/ceph/ceph/tree/pacific). I am trying navigate the code using gdb breakpoints but it seems to not be working for me (I attached the pid of an osd node to gdb and set breakpoints, but the breakpoints are never hit). Could you please tell me what I could be missing and what is the recommended way to set up a debugger with the ceph source code? If there is a write-up that I might have missed, could you also please point me to that? Thank You, Surabhi Gupta Graduate Student - University of Wisconsin Madison

1 year, 10 months

2
1
0 0

v16.2.5 Pacific released

by David Galloway

We're happy to announce the 5th backport release in the Pacific series. We recommend users to update to this release. For a detailed release notes with links & changelog please refer to the official blog entry at https://ceph.io/en/news/blog/2021/v16-2-5-pacific-released Notable Changes --------------- * `ceph-mgr-modules-core` debian package does not recommend `ceph-mgr-rook` anymore. As the latter depends on `python3-numpy` which cannot be imported in different Python sub-interpreters multi-times if the version of `python3-numpy` is older than 1.19. Since `apt-get` installs the `Recommends` packages by default, `ceph-mgr-rook` was always installed along with `ceph-mgr` debian package as an indirect dependency. If your workflow depends on this behavior, you might want to install `ceph-mgr-rook` separately. * mgr/nfs: `nfs` module is moved out of volumes plugin. Prior using the `ceph nfs` commands, `nfs` mgr module must be enabled. * volumes/nfs: The `cephfs` cluster type has been removed from the `nfs cluster create` subcommand. Clusters deployed by cephadm can support an NFS export of both `rgw` and `cephfs` from a single NFS cluster instance. * The `nfs cluster update` command has been removed. You can modify the placement of an existing NFS service (and/or its associated ingress service) using `orch ls --export` and `orch apply -i ...`. * The `orch apply nfs` command no longer requires a pool or namespace argument. We strongly encourage users to use the defaults so that the `nfs cluster ls` and related commands will work properly. * The `nfs cluster delete` and `nfs export delete` commands are deprecated and will be removed in a future release. Please use `nfs cluster rm` and `nfs export rm` instead. * A long-standing bug that prevented 32-bit and 64-bit client/server interoperability under msgr v2 has been fixed. In particular, mixing armv7l (armhf) and x86_64 or aarch64 servers in the same cluster now works. Getting Ceph ------------ * Git at git://github.com/ceph/ceph.git * Tarball at https://download.ceph.com/tarballs/ceph-16.2.5.tar.gz * For packages, see https://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/install/get-packages/ * Release git sha1: 0883bdea7337b95e4b611c768c0279868462204a

1 year, 10 months

2
1
0 0

Re: [ceph-users] pgcalc tool removed (or moved?) from ceph.com ?

by Dominik Csapak

On 7/5/21 09:55, Dominik Csapak wrote: > Hi, > > just wanted to ask if it is intentional that > > http://ceph.com/pgcalc/ > > results in a 404 error? > > is there any alternative url? > it is still linked from the offical docs. > > with kind regards > Dominik > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users(a)ceph.io > To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io > hi, is there any info on this? (cc'ing the dev list too, maybe it helps) kind regards Dominik

1 year, 10 months

1
0
0 0

16.2.5 QE pacific validation status

by Yuri Weinstein

We plan to publish this release on or before 7/9/21. Details of this release summarized here: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/51480#note-1 Please review and add commits to the release notes: https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/42170 Seeking review/approval (please review failures and add ticket numbers if possible): rados - Neha, Ernesto ? rgw - Casey? rbd - Ilya? krbd - Ilya? fs - Patrick? upgrade/nautilus-x (pacific) - Casey ? (are we missing a backport?) upgrade/pacific-p2p - Neha, Josh ? Thx YuriW

1 year, 10 months

7
8
0 0

next pacific release

by Yuri Weinstein

We plan to start QE and release the next pacific release in the next 2 weeks. If you have urgent PR please let me know ASAP. Thx YuriW

1 year, 10 months

2
5
0 0

CDM next week (APAC-friendly time)

by Josh Durgin

Hey folks, we've got July's CDM scheduled for 7 July at 2100 ET (8 July. 0100 UTC). Please add topics to the agenda here: https://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph/wiki/CDM_07-JUL-2021?parent=Planning Josh

1 year, 10 months

1
1
0 0

Ceph survey results

by changcheng.liu

Hi all, I'm reading the ceph survey results: https://ceph.io/community/2021-ceph-user-survey-results. Do we have the data about which type of AsyncMessenger is used? TCP/RDMA/DPDK. What's the reason that RDMA & DPDK isn't often used? B.R. Jerry

1 year, 10 months

2
1
0 0

07/01/2021 perf meeting is on!

by Mark Nelson

Hi Folks, The performance meeting will be starting in about 35 minutes! Today we will talk a little bit about osd_client_message_cap and the implementation of throttling and flow control. Hope to see you there! Etherpad: https://pad.ceph.com/p/performance_weekly Bluejeans: https://bluejeans.com/908675367 Mark

1 year, 11 months

1
0
0 0

Base container image for Ceph

by Patrick Donnelly

Hi Dimitri, Right now we're using CentOS for the base image for Ceph containers. Now that CentOS is moving to a rolling-upgrade-esque style release with CentOS Stream, it's an open question if we should stick with it. A more stable base image that gets reliable security fixes would be preferable. One thought is to use Red Hat's Universal Base Image (UBI) [1] which is just RHEL-lite with a target audience of upstream projects. Or perhaps we can select another base image. What do you think? [1] https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/introducing-red-hat-universal-base-image -- Patrick Donnelly, Ph.D. He / Him / His Principal Software Engineer Red Hat Sunnyvale, CA GPG: 19F28A586F808C2402351B93C3301A3E258DD79D

1 year, 11 months

7
9
0 0

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

Dev July 2021