We ssd device class on rook-ceph built clusters on m5 instances (devices appear as nvme) On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 2:48 PM Mark Nelson <mnelson@redhat.com> wrote:
On 11/21/19 4:46 PM, Mark Nelson wrote:
On 11/21/19 4:25 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
Adding dev@ceph.io
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019, Muhammad Ahmad wrote:
While trying to research how crush maps are used/modified I stumbled upon these device classes. https://ceph.io/community/new-luminous-crush-device-classes/
I wanted to highlight that having nvme as a separate class will eventually break and should be removed.
There is already a push within the industry to consolidate future command sets and NVMe will likely be it. In other words, NVMe HDDs are not too far off. In fact, the recent October OCP F2F discussed this topic in detail.
If the classification is based on performance then command set (SATA/SAS/NVMe) is probably not the right classification. I opened a PR that does this:
https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/31796
I can't remember seeing 'nvme' as a device class on any real cluster; the exceptoin is my basement one, and I think the only reason it ended up that way was because I deployed bluestore *very* early on (with ceph-disk) and the is_nvme() detection helper doesn't work with LVM. That's my theory at least.. can anybody with bluestore on NVMe devices confirm? Does anybody see class 'nvme' devices in their cluster?
Thanks! sage
Here's what we've got on the new performance nodes with Intel NVMe drives:
ID CLASS WEIGHT TYPE NAME -1 64.00000 root default -3 64.00000 rack localrack -2 8.00000 host o03 0 ssd 1.00000 osd.0 1 ssd 1.00000 osd.1 2 ssd 1.00000 osd.2 3 ssd 1.00000 osd.3 4 ssd 1.00000 osd.4 5 ssd 1.00000 osd.5 6 ssd 1.00000 osd.6 7 ssd 1.00000 osd.7
Mark
I should probably clarify that this cluster was built with cbt though!
Mark _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list -- dev@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@ceph.io