On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 1:43 PM Sage Weil <sweil@redhat.com> wrote:
On Wed, 23 Oct 2019, Sebastian Wagner wrote:
- The 'name' here, IIUC, is the name of the grouping of daemons. I think it was intended to be a file system, as per the docs:
The ``name`` parameter is an identifier of the group of instances:
* a CephFS file system for a group of MDS daemons, * a zone name for a group of RGWs
but IIRC the new CephFS behavior is that all standby daemons go into the same pool and are doled out to file systems that need them arbitrarily.
We use this to set the name of the Rook CR, and this is afaik still supposed to be the fs name.
Patrick: this will be confusing the rook case too, right? Imagine two CephFileSystem CRs, each saying 3 mds daemons, but in reality the pool of 6 MDSs will be assigned randomly-ish to either fs?
That's correct. MDSs are not distinguished in any way by the mons. We should just use random alphabetical names for each daemon. There may come a day when we want to assign new MDS daemons to a particular FS. The most justifiable reason for it would be that a production FS needs MDSs with more memory. I think we should do it differently than with per-MDS configurations we had before. We would also want to consider stretch clusters; the previous configurations didn't describe that scenario easily. -- Patrick Donnelly, Ph.D. He / Him / His Senior Software Engineer Red Hat Sunnyvale, CA GPG: 19F28A586F808C2402351B93C3301A3E258DD79D