2 Oct
2019
2 Oct
'19
1:38 a.m.
Hi all,
We conduct yearly user surveys to better under how our users utilize Ceph.
The Ceph Foundation collects the data under the Community Data License
agreement [0]; which helps the community make more of an informed decision
of where our efforts in the development of future releases should go.
Back in August, I asked for the community to help draft the next survey
[1]. I'm happy to provide a draft of the user survey for 2019. I'm sending
this to the dev list in hopes of getting feedback before sending it to the
Ceph users list.
The first question I received was using something other than Survey monkey
due to it not being available in some regions. I have been using another
third-party service for our Ceph Days CFP forms, and luckily they offer a
survey service that isn't blocked.
A second question that came up was how to layout questions for multiple
cluster deployments. An idea I had was having our general Ceph user survey
[2] separate from the deployment questions [3]. The general questions only
need to be answered once, and the deployment survey can be answered
multiple times to capture the different configurations. I'm looking into a
way to link the answers of both surveys together.
Any feedback, corrections or ideas?
[0] - https://cdla.io/sharing-1-0/
[1] -
https://lists.ceph.io/hyperkitty/list/ceph-users@ceph.io/thread/Q3NCHOJN45D…
[2] -
https://ceph.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Ceph-User-Survey-general.pdf
[3] -
https://ceph.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Ceph-User-Survey-Clusters.pdf
--
Mike Perez
he/him
Ceph Community Manager
M: +1-951-572-2633
494C 5D25 2968 D361 65FB 3829 94BC D781 ADA8 8AEA
@Thingee <https://twitter.com/thingee> Thingee
<https://www.linkedin.com/thingee> <https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc>
<https://www.redhat.com>
2 Oct
2 Oct
4:32 a.m.
I feel like some of the options should be multiple choice for people running multiple
clusters. I'm assuming that the circles mean a single choice and squares mean
multiple choice in your PDFs.
1. The question on which Ceph release do you run should be: "Which Ceph release(s) do
you run?"
2. The question on how many OSDs do you have in each node could vary. This could be
because a newer sku was added to the cluster which supports more OSDs, or the SSD nodes in
a cluster could have a different number of OSDs then the HDD nodes.
3. The OSD backends question could be both BlueStore and FileStore XFS.
4. The types of storage devices should have an Other field (Optane?)
Bryan
On Oct 1, 2019, at 2:08 PM, Mike Perez
<miperez@redhat.com<mailto:miperez@redhat.com>> wrote:
Notice: This email is from an external sender.
Hi all,
We conduct yearly user surveys to better under how our users utilize Ceph. The Ceph
Foundation collects the data under the Community Data License agreement [0]; which helps
the community make more of an informed decision of where our efforts in the development of
future releases should go.
Back in August, I asked for the community to help draft the next survey [1]. I'm happy
to provide a draft of the user survey for 2019. I'm sending this to the dev list in
hopes of getting feedback before sending it to the Ceph users list.
The first question I received was using something other than Survey monkey due to it not
being available in some regions. I have been using another third-party service for our
Ceph Days CFP forms, and luckily they offer a survey service that isn't blocked.
A second question that came up was how to layout questions for multiple cluster
deployments. An idea I had was having our general Ceph user survey [2] separate from the
deployment questions [3]. The general questions only need to be answered once, and the
deployment survey can be answered multiple times to capture the different configurations.
I'm looking into a way to link the answers of both surveys together.
Any feedback, corrections or ideas?
[0] - https://cdla.io/sharing-1-0/
[1] -
https://lists.ceph.io/hyperkitty/list/ceph-users@ceph.io/thread/Q3NCHOJN45D…
[2] - https://ceph.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Ceph-User-Survey-general.pdf
[3] - https://ceph.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Ceph-User-Survey-Clusters.pdf
--
Mike Perez
he/him
Ceph Community Manager
M: +1-951-572-2633<tel:+1-951-572-2633>
494C 5D25 2968 D361 65FB 3829 94BC D781 ADA8 8AEA
@Thingee<https://twitter.com/thingee>
Thingee<https://www.linkedin.com/thingee>
<https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc>
[https://static.redhat.com/libs/redhat/brand-assets/2/corp/logo--200.png]<…
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev@ceph.io<mailto:dev@ceph.io>
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@ceph.io<mailto:dev-leave@ceph.io>
![https://static.redhat.com/libs/redhat/brand-assets/2/corp/logo--200.png]<…](https://static.redhat.com/libs/redhat/brand-assets/2/corp/logo--200.png]%3Chttps://www.redhat.com/%3E){kind=link}
8 Oct
8 Oct
7:49 a.m.
Hi Mike Perez,
What's about the question "Which type of messenger is configured in the cluster?
Posix or RDMA or DPDK"
--Thanks
Changcheng
From: Bryan Stillwell [mailto:bstillwell@godaddy.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 2, 2019 7:03 AM
To: Mike Perez <miperez(a)redhat.com>
Cc: dev(a)ceph.io; Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb(a)suse.com>
Subject: Re: Need feedback for Ceph User Survey 2019
I feel like some of the options should be multiple choice for people running multiple
clusters. I'm assuming that the circles mean a single choice and squares mean
multiple choice in your PDFs.
1. The question on which Ceph release do you run should be: "Which Ceph release(s) do
you run?"
2. The question on how many OSDs do you have in each node could vary. This could be
because a newer sku was added to the cluster which supports more OSDs, or the SSD nodes in
a cluster could have a different number of OSDs then the HDD nodes.
3. The OSD backends question could be both BlueStore and FileStore XFS.
4. The types of storage devices should have an Other field (Optane?)
Bryan
On Oct 1, 2019, at 2:08 PM, Mike Perez
<miperez@redhat.com<mailto:miperez@redhat.com>> wrote:
Notice: This email is from an external sender.
Hi all,
We conduct yearly user surveys to better under how our users utilize Ceph. The Ceph
Foundation collects the data under the Community Data License agreement [0]; which helps
the community make more of an informed decision of where our efforts in the development of
future releases should go.
Back in August, I asked for the community to help draft the next survey [1]. I'm happy
to provide a draft of the user survey for 2019. I'm sending this to the dev list in
hopes of getting feedback before sending it to the Ceph users list.
The first question I received was using something other than Survey monkey due to it not
being available in some regions. I have been using another third-party service for our
Ceph Days CFP forms, and luckily they offer a survey service that isn't blocked.
A second question that came up was how to layout questions for multiple cluster
deployments. An idea I had was having our general Ceph user survey [2] separate from the
deployment questions [3]. The general questions only need to be answered once, and the
deployment survey can be answered multiple times to capture the different configurations.
I'm looking into a way to link the answers of both surveys together.
Any feedback, corrections or ideas?
[0] - https://cdla.io/sharing-1-0/
[1] -
https://lists.ceph.io/hyperkitty/list/ceph-users@ceph.io/thread/Q3NCHOJN45D…
[2] - https://ceph.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Ceph-User-Survey-general.pdf
[3] - https://ceph.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Ceph-User-Survey-Clusters.pdf
--
Mike Perez
he/him
Ceph Community Manager
M: +1-951-572-2633<tel:+1-951-572-2633>
494C 5D25 2968 D361 65FB 3829 94BC D781 ADA8 8AEA
@Thingee<https://twitter.com/thingee>
Thingee<https://www.linkedin.com/thingee>
<https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc>
[https://static.redhat.com/libs/redhat/brand-assets/2/corp/logo--200.png]<…
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev@ceph.io<mailto:dev@ceph.io>
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@ceph.io<mailto:dev-leave@ceph.io>
2 Oct
2 Oct
9:45 p.m.
On 2019-10-01T16:08:43, Mike Perez <miperez(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Hi all,
yay, survey time!
We conduct yearly user surveys to better under how our
users utilize Ceph.
The Ceph Foundation collects the data under the Community Data License
agreement [0]; which helps the community make more of an informed decision
of where our efforts in the development of future releases should go.
I also like we're collecting this under the CDLA 1.0 Sharing variant
(means we need to avoid any e-mail addresses and org names though, I
think; folks probably don't want those globally shared).
A second question that came up was how to layout
questions for multiple
cluster deployments. An idea I had was having our general Ceph user survey
[2] separate from the deployment questions [3]. The general questions only
need to be answered once, and the deployment survey can be answered
multiple times to capture the different configurations. I'm looking into a
way to link the answers of both surveys together.
I think, perhaps, we can just ask for the aggregates across all
clusters. If we make it too detailed, it'll be too complex for
respondents to enter and we'll not hear from them.
Alternatively, we could perhaps have a table for the per-cluster
questions, each row representing one cluster or even pool.
(e.g., if they have a 10 PiB cluster hosting both hosting 1 PiB
replicated metadata and hot data and 6 PiB 8+4 S3 data, what is the
answer?)
I guess my point is - unless we're going to that level of detail, we're
already aggregating (and losing details) at the per-cluster level and
per-org aggregation isn't too bad. I'd rather lower the barrier to
respond -> "check all that apply" (would make most of our questions
multiple choice).
We should instead focus on getting that level of detail from Telemetry
in 2020.
An intermediate solution could be to ask them to "run this command on
each of your clusters and paste the output here". But if we ask them to
spend 5-10 minutes answering questions per cluster ...
(Alas we can't ask them to just turn on Telemetry, not backported and
feature complete to all relevant releases. Perhaps we could build a
standalone Telemetry client for pre-Nautilus releases? But not for this
cycle.)
For the fields where we do ask numbers, instead of endless drop-down
lists, I'd rather ask for a, well, number. Why give them a drop-down
list for total raw capacity? Why not just ask for the number of
clusters? How many nodes? Etc, even for replication size/EC profiles.
And we should filter redundant questions - if we ask, say, for both the
total number of nodes, and the total number of OSDs, we don't have to
ask "how many OSDs per node". Unless we consider this a consistency
check.
The survey pad has a lot of feedback, some of it contradictory, and not
all questions asked consistently. So it's not perfectly clear to me what
the current consolidated draft would look like.
Perhaps if we do that prior to posting to ceph-users, that'd be
helpful.
Regards,
Lars
--
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
"Architects should open possibilities and not determine everything." (Ueli
Zbinden)
3 Oct
3 Oct
8:24 p.m.
New subject: Need feedback for Ceph User Survey 2019 [EXT]
Hi,
A second question that came up was how to layout
questions for multiple
cluster deployments. An idea I had was having our general Ceph user
survey [2] separate from the deployment questions [3]. The general
questions only need to be answered once, and the deployment survey can
be answered multiple times to capture the different configurations. I'm
looking into a way to link the answers of both surveys together.
Thanks for putting these out for review. I have perhaps written too much
in response... :)
I think, in general, many of the questions need an "Other" option - e.g.
the "Why use Ceph" question
In the general questionnaire, you ask about telemetry on "your" cluster,
but people might e.g. have several clusters not all of which have
telemetry available; similarly, I'd make the "why not" question allow >1
answer - it might be "Well, I run Luminous now, but I don't expect to
run telemetry when we move to Nautilus because..."
The clusters questionnaire is tricky - it's a lot to fill out if you
want folk to do it for every one of their clusters; might you perhaps
instead request people fill it out for 1 cluster (production / largest /
...)? It's not clear how I would represent multiple different clusters
in the answers to this questionnaire, to be honest, unless they were all
essentially the same hardware/software/layout/etc. And I hope that the
UI allows e.g. someone who didn't tick that they ran CephFS not to be
shown the CephFS questions later.
I agree with the suggestion of just letting people type in a number for
all the "number of.." questions; if you do that, do you need the "how
many OSDs per node" question?
"How many OSDs in you cluster?" is a typo (you meant "your") I think.
The "number of hours" questions need clarification - do you mean per
week? [and "Number of hours troubleshooting the ceph client
configuration and software" is duplicated]. I'm guessing these things
aren't evenly spread over time, either (e.g. I spend much more time on
config/software around a major release bump)
I suspect that the "how long to apply updates" question might need a
"depends on my vendor" answer? It'd take something like a serious CVE
for us to upgrade ourselves rather than waiting for Canonical to produce
revised packages, for example, and that can take a while.
The answers to the minor updates "why?" don't quite make sense, maybe
they've been truncated (e.g. "Concerns about")
"What Ceph Manager modules did you enable?" needs a "none" option?
[ISTR
survey UIs require you to tick a box on a compulsory question]
The EC questions often look to be single-answer, but presumably people
might run more than one EC setup in the same cluster (for different pools)?
It might be worth being clearer about what storage devices you're asking
about? (e.g. for OSD storage, for journal/block.db, for host OS, for MON
store...)
The RBD section should all be multi-answer (except "are you using
snapshorts"), I think
You're inconsistent as to whether the "snapshots" question wants a
reason for either answer (RBD) or for only the No answer (RGW(?),CephFS).
Client-side S3, I wonder if s3cmd and minio (Go) might also be worth
asking about?
Regards,
Matthew
--
The Wellcome Sanger Institute is operated by Genome Research
Limited, a charity registered in England with number 1021457 and a
company registered in England with number 2742969, whose registered
office is 215 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BE.
29 Oct
29 Oct
2:02 a.m.
I did another pass and I think we can simplify. I suggest we give up on
the detailed per-cluster stats from a manual survey and instead rely on
telemetry (and/or telemetry backport to mimic/luminous if we *really* want
that data), and then consolidate this into a handful of easy questions in
the general survey.
On the general part,
- telemetry 'why' question: make it a "check all that apply" + comment
...the add:
- How many clusters do you operate? [fill in number]
- Which Ceph releases do you run? Check all that apply
(list nautilus -> argonaut)
- Total aggregate cluster capacity in TB [fill in number]
- Largest cluster capacity in TB [fill in number]
and then copy most of the other cluster answers back over to the main
one, converting anything that is a selection to a 'check all that a
pply'. e.g.,
- Which Ceph packages (copy/move from cluster survey, but check all that
apply)
- What operating system(s) are you using on cluster nodes? (copy/move,
but check all that apply)
A few things could be dropped to simplify:
- how many hosts, osds, osds per node, osd backends, redundancy
- number of hours (unless we can simplify this?)
- data protection scheme
- size/min_size
- which osd layout features
- what type of NICs
- RGW: 'do you use snapshots?' subquestion (not a thing)
Change:
- What process architectures
- add Power
- Typical number of fs clients (per cluster)
- number of files ... (for largest cluster, if multiple clusters)
- MDS cache size ... (for largest cluster, if multiple clusters)
- number of active MDS for largest cluster [just type in value, not a
multiple choice]
A few of these still fall into the category of things we should capture
with telemetry.. I'm not quite sure where to draw the line, but generally
think we should lean toward simplicity. Like, all of those Change items
:)
Lars, WDYT?
sage
On Tue, 1 Oct 2019, Mike Perez wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We conduct yearly user surveys to better under how our users utilize Ceph.
> The Ceph Foundation collects the data under the Community Data License
> agreement [0]; which helps the community make more of an informed decision
> of where our efforts in the development of future releases should go.
>
> Back in August, I asked for the community to help draft the next survey
> [1]. I'm happy to provide a draft of the user survey for 2019. I'm sending
> this to the dev list in hopes of getting feedback before sending it to the
> Ceph users list.
>
> The first question I received was using something other than Survey monkey
> due to it not being available in some regions. I have been using another
> third-party service for our Ceph Days CFP forms, and luckily they offer a
> survey service that isn't blocked.
>
> A second question that came up was how to layout questions for multiple
> cluster deployments. An idea I had was having our general Ceph user survey
> [2] separate from the deployment questions [3]. The general questions only
> need to be answered once, and the deployment survey can be answered
> multiple times to capture the different configurations. I'm looking into a
> way to link the answers of both surveys together.
>
> Any feedback, corrections or ideas?
>
> [0] - https://cdla.io/sharing-1-0/
> [1] -
>
https://lists.ceph.io/hyperkitty/list/ceph-users@ceph.io/thread/Q3NCHOJN45D…
> [2] -
> https://ceph.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Ceph-User-Survey-general.pdf
> [3] -
> https://ceph.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Ceph-User-Survey-Clusters.pdf
>
> --
>
> Mike Perez
>
> he/him
>
> Ceph Community Manager
>
>
> M: +1-951-572-2633
>
> 494C 5D25 2968 D361 65FB 3829 94BC D781 ADA8 8AEA
> @Thingee <https://twitter.com/thingee> Thingee
> <https://www.linkedin.com/thingee> <https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc>
> <https://www.redhat.com>
>
8:13 p.m.
On 2019-10-28T20:32:17, Sage Weil <sage(a)newdream.net> wrote:
I did another pass and I think we can simplify. I
suggest we give up on
the detailed per-cluster stats from a manual survey and instead rely on
telemetry (and/or telemetry backport to mimic/luminous if we *really* want
that data), and then consolidate this into a handful of easy questions in
the general survey.
Ack.
On the general part,
- telemetry 'why' question: make it a "check all that apply" + comment
Yes.
...the add:
- How many clusters do you operate? [fill in number]
- Which Ceph releases do you run? Check all that apply
(list nautilus -> argonaut)
- Total aggregate cluster capacity in TB [fill in number]
- Largest cluster capacity in TB [fill in number]
Agreed. Though I'd also like to ask about node and OSD counts
(aggregate/largest).
We could simplify this by collapsing total/largest if they only have one
cluster - perhaps we can only show the "largest" column if >=2?
The capacity/node/disk count figures always look great in the survey
results, and will also allow us to have some comparison relative to the
last year's.
- how many hosts, osds, osds per node, osd backends,
redundancy
- data protection scheme
I'd still like to ask about the data protection schemes, perhaps for the
one with the most data?
Alternatively, we could ask them for net vs gross vs used capacity and
try to compute that from that, but I'm guessing it's easier to ask them
for the top 3 schemes they use.
The OSD FileStore/BlueStore trends would also be quite useful at this
stage, again mainly for comparison purposes. I realize we'll eventually
get that from telemetry, but we're not quite there yet.
A few of these still fall into the category of things
we should capture
with telemetry.. I'm not quite sure where to draw the line, but generally
think we should lean toward simplicity. Like, all of those Change items
:)
Yes.
Lars, WDYT?
Do we still have a chance to run this survey in 2019? End-of-year
survey?
Regards,
Lars
--
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
"Architects should open possibilities and not determine everything." (Ueli
Zbinden)
5 Nov
5 Nov
4:41 a.m.
Here's another draft with the current feedback. Sage, do you have thoughts
on keeping any of the data protection questions per Lar's suggestions?
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 1:32 PM Sage Weil <sage(a)newdream.net> wrote:
I did another pass and I think we can simplify. I
suggest we give up on
the detailed per-cluster stats from a manual survey and instead rely on
telemetry (and/or telemetry backport to mimic/luminous if we *really* want
that data), and then consolidate this into a handful of easy questions in
the general survey.
On the general part,
- telemetry 'why' question: make it a "check all that apply" + comment
...the add:
- How many clusters do you operate? [fill in number]
- Which Ceph releases do you run? Check all that apply
(list nautilus -> argonaut)
- Total aggregate cluster capacity in TB [fill in number]
- Largest cluster capacity in TB [fill in number]
and then copy most of the other cluster answers back over to the main
one, converting anything that is a selection to a 'check all that a
pply'. e.g.,
- Which Ceph packages (copy/move from cluster survey, but check all that
apply)
- What operating system(s) are you using on cluster nodes? (copy/move,
but check all that apply)
A few things could be dropped to simplify:
- how many hosts, osds, osds per node, osd backends, redundancy
- number of hours (unless we can simplify this?)
- data protection scheme
- size/min_size
- which osd layout features
- what type of NICs
- RGW: 'do you use snapshots?' subquestion (not a thing)
Change:
- What process architectures
- add Power
- Typical number of fs clients (per cluster)
- number of files ... (for largest cluster, if multiple clusters)
- MDS cache size ... (for largest cluster, if multiple clusters)
- number of active MDS for largest cluster [just type in value, not a
multiple choice]
A few of these still fall into the category of things we should capture
with telemetry.. I'm not quite sure where to draw the line, but generally
think we should lean toward simplicity. Like, all of those Change items
:)
Lars, WDYT?
sage
On Tue, 1 Oct 2019, Mike Perez wrote:
--
Mike Perez
he/him
Ceph Community Manager
M: +1-951-572-2633
494C 5D25 2968 D361 65FB 3829 94BC D781 ADA8 8AEA
@Thingee <https://twitter.com/thingee> Thingee
<https://www.linkedin.com/thingee> <https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc>
<https://www.redhat.com>
Hi all,
We conduct yearly user surveys to better under how our users utilize
Ceph.
The Ceph Foundation collects the data under the
Community Data License
agreement [0]; which helps the community make more of an informed
decision
of where our efforts in the development of future
releases should go.
Back in August, I asked for the community to help draft the next survey
[1]. I'm happy to provide a draft of the user survey for 2019. I'm
sending
this to the dev list in hopes of getting feedback
before sending it to
the
Ceph users list.
The first question I received was using something other than Survey
monkey
due to it not being available in some regions. I
have been using another
third-party service for our Ceph Days CFP forms, and luckily they offer a
survey service that isn't blocked.
A second question that came up was how to layout questions for multiple
cluster deployments. An idea I had was having our general Ceph user
survey
[2] separate from the deployment questions [3].
The general questions
only
need to be answered once, and the deployment
survey can be answered
multiple times to capture the different configurations. I'm looking into
a
way to link the answers of both surveys
together.
Any feedback, corrections or ideas?
[0] - https://cdla.io/sharing-1-0/
[1] -
https://lists.ceph.io/hyperkitty/list/ceph-users@ceph.io/thread/Q3NCHOJN45D…
[2] -
https://ceph.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Ceph-User-Survey-general.pdf
[3] -
https://ceph.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Ceph-User-Survey-Clusters.pdf
--
Mike Perez
he/him
Ceph Community Manager
M: +1-951-572-2633
494C 5D25 2968 D361 65FB 3829 94BC D781 ADA8 8AEA
@Thingee <https://twitter.com/thingee> Thingee
<https://www.linkedin.com/thingee> <https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc>
<https://www.redhat.com>
5:46 a.m.
Hi Mike Perez,
Is it possible to add one item to get feedback about which messenger type is used in
deployed cluster? TCP-Posix or DPDK or RDMA?
B.R.
Changcheng
From: Mike Perez [mailto:miperez@redhat.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 7:11 AM
To: Sage Weil <sage(a)newdream.net>
Cc: dev(a)ceph.io; Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb(a)suse.com>
Subject: Re: Need feedback for Ceph User Survey 2019
Here's another draft with the current feedback. Sage, do you have thoughts on keeping
any of the data protection questions per Lar's suggestions?
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 1:32 PM Sage Weil
<sage@newdream.net<mailto:sage@newdream.net>> wrote:
I did another pass and I think we can simplify. I suggest we give up on
the detailed per-cluster stats from a manual survey and instead rely on
telemetry (and/or telemetry backport to mimic/luminous if we *really* want
that data), and then consolidate this into a handful of easy questions in
the general survey.
On the general part,
- telemetry 'why' question: make it a "check all that apply" + comment
...the add:
- How many clusters do you operate? [fill in number]
- Which Ceph releases do you run? Check all that apply
(list nautilus -> argonaut)
- Total aggregate cluster capacity in TB [fill in number]
- Largest cluster capacity in TB [fill in number]
and then copy most of the other cluster answers back over to the main
one, converting anything that is a selection to a 'check all that a
pply'. e.g.,
- Which Ceph packages (copy/move from cluster survey, but check all that
apply)
- What operating system(s) are you using on cluster nodes? (copy/move,
but check all that apply)
A few things could be dropped to simplify:
- how many hosts, osds, osds per node, osd backends, redundancy
- number of hours (unless we can simplify this?)
- data protection scheme
- size/min_size
- which osd layout features
- what type of NICs
- RGW: 'do you use snapshots?' subquestion (not a thing)
Change:
- What process architectures
- add Power
- Typical number of fs clients (per cluster)
- number of files ... (for largest cluster, if multiple clusters)
- MDS cache size ... (for largest cluster, if multiple clusters)
- number of active MDS for largest cluster [just type in value, not a
multiple choice]
A few of these still fall into the category of things we should capture
with telemetry.. I'm not quite sure where to draw the line, but generally
think we should lean toward simplicity. Like, all of those Change items
:)
Lars, WDYT?
sage
On Tue, 1 Oct 2019, Mike Perez wrote:
Hi all,
We conduct yearly user surveys to better under how our users utilize Ceph.
The Ceph Foundation collects the data under the Community Data License
agreement [0]; which helps the community make more of an informed decision
of where our efforts in the development of future releases should go.
Back in August, I asked for the community to help draft the next survey
[1]. I'm happy to provide a draft of the user survey for 2019. I'm sending
this to the dev list in hopes of getting feedback before sending it to the
Ceph users list.
The first question I received was using something other than Survey monkey
due to it not being available in some regions. I have been using another
third-party service for our Ceph Days CFP forms, and luckily they offer a
survey service that isn't blocked.
A second question that came up was how to layout questions for multiple
cluster deployments. An idea I had was having our general Ceph user survey
[2] separate from the deployment questions [3]. The general questions only
need to be answered once, and the deployment survey can be answered
multiple times to capture the different configurations. I'm looking into a
way to link the answers of both surveys together.
Any feedback, corrections or ideas?
[0] - https://cdla.io/sharing-1-0/
[1] -
https://lists.ceph.io/hyperkitty/list/ceph-users@ceph.io/thread/Q3NCHOJN45D…
[2] -
https://ceph.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Ceph-User-Survey-general.pdf
[3] -
https://ceph.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Ceph-User-Survey-Clusters.pdf
--
Mike Perez
he/him
Ceph Community Manager
M: +1-951-572-2633
494C 5D25 2968 D361 65FB 3829 94BC D781 ADA8 8AEA
@Thingee <https://twitter.com/thingee> Thingee
<https://www.linkedin.com/thingee> <https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc>
<https://www.redhat.com>
--
Mike Perez
he/him
Ceph Community Manager
M: +1-951-572-2633<tel:+1-951-572-2633>
494C 5D25 2968 D361 65FB 3829 94BC D781 ADA8 8AEA
@Thingee<https://twitter.com/thingee>
Thingee<https://www.linkedin.com/thingee>
<https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc>
[https://static.redhat.com/libs/redhat/brand-assets/2/corp/logo--200.png]<…
![https://static.redhat.com/libs/redhat/brand-assets/2/corp/logo--200.png]<…](https://static.redhat.com/libs/redhat/brand-assets/2/corp/logo--200.png]%3Chttps://www.redhat.com%3E){kind=link}
6:17 a.m.
On Mon, 4 Nov 2019, Mike Perez wrote:
Here's another draft with the current feedback.
Sage, do you have thoughts
on keeping any of the data protection questions per Lar's suggestions?
No opinion... so sure.
Few small edits:
- Total raw and usable capacity: let them type in a box (TB)
- Which ceph release question should be release(s), w/ checkboxes
- What Ceph Manager modules question: s/did/do/
- RGW auth question: checkboxes, not radio buttons
- number of rgw sites: "Number of federated RGW sites", with an entry box
Then let's ship it!
Thanks!
sage
>
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 1:32 PM Sage Weil <sage(a)newdream.net> wrote:
>
> > I did another pass and I think we can simplify. I suggest we give up on
> > the detailed per-cluster stats from a manual survey and instead rely on
> > telemetry (and/or telemetry backport to mimic/luminous if we *really* want
> > that data), and then consolidate this into a handful of easy questions in
> > the general survey.
> >
> > On the general part,
> >
> > - telemetry 'why' question: make it a "check all that apply" +
comment
> >
> > ...the add:
> >
> > - How many clusters do you operate? [fill in number]
> > - Which Ceph releases do you run? Check all that apply
> > (list nautilus -> argonaut)
> > - Total aggregate cluster capacity in TB [fill in number]
> > - Largest cluster capacity in TB [fill in number]
> >
> > and then copy most of the other cluster answers back over to the main
> > one, converting anything that is a selection to a 'check all that a
> > pply'. e.g.,
> >
> > - Which Ceph packages (copy/move from cluster survey, but check all that
> > apply)
> > - What operating system(s) are you using on cluster nodes? (copy/move,
> > but check all that apply)
> >
> > A few things could be dropped to simplify:
> >
> > - how many hosts, osds, osds per node, osd backends, redundancy
> > - number of hours (unless we can simplify this?)
> > - data protection scheme
> > - size/min_size
> > - which osd layout features
> > - what type of NICs
> > - RGW: 'do you use snapshots?' subquestion (not a thing)
> >
> > Change:
> > - What process architectures
> > - add Power
> > - Typical number of fs clients (per cluster)
> > - number of files ... (for largest cluster, if multiple clusters)
> > - MDS cache size ... (for largest cluster, if multiple clusters)
> > - number of active MDS for largest cluster [just type in value, not a
> > multiple choice]
> >
> > A few of these still fall into the category of things we should capture
> > with telemetry.. I'm not quite sure where to draw the line, but generally
> > think we should lean toward simplicity. Like, all of those Change items
> > :)
> >
> > Lars, WDYT?
> >
> > sage
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019, Mike Perez wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > We conduct yearly user surveys to better under how our users utilize
> > Ceph.
> > > The Ceph Foundation collects the data under the Community Data License
> > > agreement [0]; which helps the community make more of an informed
> > decision
> > > of where our efforts in the development of future releases should go.
> > >
> > > Back in August, I asked for the community to help draft the next survey
> > > [1]. I'm happy to provide a draft of the user survey for 2019. I'm
> > sending
> > > this to the dev list in hopes of getting feedback before sending it to
> > the
> > > Ceph users list.
> > >
> > > The first question I received was using something other than Survey
> > monkey
> > > due to it not being available in some regions. I have been using another
> > > third-party service for our Ceph Days CFP forms, and luckily they offer a
> > > survey service that isn't blocked.
> > >
> > > A second question that came up was how to layout questions for multiple
> > > cluster deployments. An idea I had was having our general Ceph user
> > survey
> > > [2] separate from the deployment questions [3]. The general questions
> > only
> > > need to be answered once, and the deployment survey can be answered
> > > multiple times to capture the different configurations. I'm looking
into
> > a
> > > way to link the answers of both surveys together.
> > >
> > > Any feedback, corrections or ideas?
> > >
> > > [0] - https://cdla.io/sharing-1-0/
> > > [1] -
> > >
> >
https://lists.ceph.io/hyperkitty/list/ceph-users@ceph.io/thread/Q3NCHOJN45D…
> > > [2] -
> > > https://ceph.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Ceph-User-Survey-general.pdf
> > > [3] -
> > > https://ceph.io/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Ceph-User-Survey-Clusters.pdf
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Mike Perez
> > >
> > > he/him
> > >
> > > Ceph Community Manager
> > >
> > >
> > > M: +1-951-572-2633
> > >
> > > 494C 5D25 2968 D361 65FB 3829 94BC D781 ADA8 8AEA
> > > @Thingee <https://twitter.com/thingee> Thingee
> > > <https://www.linkedin.com/thingee>
<https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc>
> > > <https://www.redhat.com>
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Mike Perez
>
> he/him
>
> Ceph Community Manager
>
>
> M: +1-951-572-2633
>
> 494C 5D25 2968 D361 65FB 3829 94BC D781 ADA8 8AEA
> @Thingee <https://twitter.com/thingee> Thingee
> <https://www.linkedin.com/thingee> <https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc>
> <https://www.redhat.com>
>
7:26 p.m.
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:11 AM Mike Perez <miperez(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Here's another draft with the current feedback. Sage, do you have thoughts on keeping
any of the data protection questions per Lar's suggestions?
- Do you using cache tiering?
s/using/use
- In "How soon do you apply dot/minor releases to your cluster? Why?"
I see "Concerns about" and "Concerns about new". Was that supposed
to be "Concerns about stability", etc?
- RBD section is the only one that has "Environment status" question.
Should we add it to RGW and CephFS sections as well?
Thanks,
Ilya
8:10 p.m.
On 2019-11-04T15:11:11, Mike Perez <miperez(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Here's another draft with the current feedback.
Sage, do you have thoughts
on keeping any of the data protection questions per Lar's suggestions?
In addition to the comments from others:
In the CephFS section, we ask about the "typical" number of fs clients.
Everywhere else we ask about the aggregate. Is that intentional?
I'm just wondering if this tells us anything, e.g., imagine someone
responding with 5 clusters, only one of them with CephFS, "typical" then
would be "1-5"?
Should perhaps ask about the largest, like the next question - or the
total?
For active MDS, we again ask for the total and also the largest number.
Should we do the same for the previous questions for consistency?
Again, I'd turn those into number entry fields rather than drop down.
Snapshots -> No, please specify "why not"
Everything else looks good.
Joao also wants to look into if the telemetry plugin may be backportable
to Luminous. (I don't think earlier makes sense.) That'll help with the
data set for the slow adopters.
Regards,
Lars
--
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
"Architects should open possibilities and not determine everything." (Ueli
Zbinden)
9 Nov
9 Nov
1:18 a.m.
Another pass on the survey with everyone's suggestions.
On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 6:44 AM Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb(a)suse.com> wrote:
On 2019-11-04T15:11:11, Mike Perez
<miperez(a)redhat.com> wrote:
--
Mike Perez
he/him
Ceph Community Manager
M: +1-951-572-2633
494C 5D25 2968 D361 65FB 3829 94BC D781 ADA8 8AEA
@Thingee <https://twitter.com/thingee> Thingee
<https://www.linkedin.com/thingee> <https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc>
<https://www.redhat.com>
Here's another draft with the current
feedback. Sage, do you have
thoughts
on keeping any of the data protection questions
per Lar's suggestions?
In addition to the comments from others:
In the CephFS section, we ask about the "typical" number of fs clients.
Everywhere else we ask about the aggregate. Is that intentional?
I'm just wondering if this tells us anything, e.g., imagine someone
responding with 5 clusters, only one of them with CephFS, "typical" then
would be "1-5"?
Should perhaps ask about the largest, like the next question - or the
total?
For active MDS, we again ask for the total and also the largest number.
Should we do the same for the previous questions for consistency?
Again, I'd turn those into number entry fields rather than drop down.
Snapshots -> No, please specify "why not"
Everything else looks good.
Joao also wants to look into if the telemetry plugin may be backportable
to Luminous. (I don't think earlier makes sense.) That'll help with the
data set for the slow adopters.
Regards,
Lars
--
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah, HRB
21284 (AG Nürnberg)
"Architects should open possibilities and not determine everything." (Ueli
Zbinden)
4:02 a.m.
On 2019-11-08T11:48:39, Mike Perez <miperez(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Another pass on the survey with everyone's
suggestions.
Thanks! Much appreciated, and I think we could roll this.
Though the sizing questions still leave me confused. Why can't they
enter numbers for their total raw capacity?
For CephFS:
I just noticed that for the clients it's ranges, for files#, it's an
order of magnitude (I have 5mil, what do I choose? And what does 10+
mean?), then ranges (two of them overlapping) for MDS cache size, and
number of MDS is actually asked twice (with very narrow ranges, and then
as free entry; remove the former?).
I think just replacing these with number entry fields would be best. But
I'm not the CephFS expert who asked them, so take that with a large
pinch of salt.
Let's roll and then make sure everyone gets telemetry enabled so we can
stop asking :-D
Regards,
Lars
--
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
"Architects should open possibilities and not determine everything." (Ueli
Zbinden)
22 Nov
22 Nov
8:21 p.m.
On 2019-11-08T11:48:39, Mike Perez <miperez(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Sage just shared the link to the survey on Zoho. Thanks!
Minor feedback (sorry about that, some things only become clear seeing
the actual forms) that'd be nice to address but are optional:
Page 1:
- "Is telemetry enabled in your cluster*s*" (might have more than one)
And then also add "Partially" as an answer.
- Can we had the "If not" sections unless folks have not picked
"Yes"?
- "How do you participate in the Ceph community?"
- Add "Member of Ceph Foundation" as an answer ;-)
- The country list is intimidating; is there any way with Zoho to make
this a drop down selection or tag cloud? (This is purely visual)
Page 2:
- Total usable capacity should also be a number entry to match the
previous questions
- Is someone possibly running "Master" or do we rather not even dare
ask?
- "Which Ceph Manager modules" probably should have a "I do not know"
answer, or "Not applicable" (if < Luminous), and definitely also
"Telemetry" / "Prometheus"
- Messenger type (TCP-Posix) deserves being the default, or adding a
(Default) note in case users are confused
Page 3:
- IHV -> add "Prefer not to say"
Page 4:
- "What are the use cases" -> add "Backup"
Page RBD:
- "Do you use snapshots" -> No already opens a text entry field, the
last "Why?" is perhaps redundant on that page?
Page RGW:
- That the workload choices differ across all pages is highly annoying
and will make data analysis harder ;-)
Page CephFS:
- See previous comment
- Everywhere else the environment status is before the workload question
- My comments regarding "Number of files" being unclear about which way
to round have not been addressed. I'd suggest to add a "< " in front
of the fields instead of a "~" to turn them into ranges.
Thanks!,
Lars
--
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
"Architects should open possibilities and not determine everything." (Ueli
Zbinden)
25 Nov
25 Nov
11:07 p.m.
Hi,
=> How about adding question about running on bare metal vs. virtualized ?
=> How about asking for layout options, like single, stretched, how many
DCs stretched over ?
=> perhaps, too, how many OSDs in the biggest cluster ?
H/W section:
in "Which type of storage devices are used?"
=> could add Optane
=> and could add specific question for NVMe and Optane for the
use case (e.g., RocksDB/WAL, OSD, OSD for object index)
in "Which OSD layout features do you use?"
=> s/Seperate/Separate/ journal device (FileStore)
=> could add separation of "RocksDB and WAL and data"
RGW section:
=> How about asking
- for the number of RGW ?
- for largest objects stored ?
- how many objects in buckets, how many buckets ?
- how many realms, max # zonegroups per realm, max # of zones
per zonegroup ?
- how about asking RGW multi-site more detailed ? (as max
values, how many sites, how many zonegroups, how many zones per group)
(we ask more detailed in MDS section, too)
CephFS section:
in "Number of files (getfattr -d -m ceph.dir.rfiles /mnt/cephfs)
(for largest cluster, if multiple clusters)": the last should be
something 10G+ or better use for M and G the more common 'm' and 'bn'
for numbers.
Don't we wanna ask for some wish list features/functionality with prio ?
(So, may be 2-3 items max.)
G,
-matt
On 22.11.19 15:51, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
On 2019-11-08T11:48:39, Mike Perez
<miperez(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Sage just shared the link to the survey on Zoho. Thanks!
Minor feedback (sorry about that, some things only become clear seeing
the actual forms) that'd be nice to address but are optional:
Page 1:
- "Is telemetry enabled in your cluster*s*" (might have more than one)
And then also add "Partially" as an answer.
- Can we had the "If not" sections unless folks have not picked
"Yes"?
- "How do you participate in the Ceph community?"
- Add "Member of Ceph Foundation" as an answer ;-)
- The country list is intimidating; is there any way with Zoho to make
this a drop down selection or tag cloud? (This is purely visual)
Page 2:
- Total usable capacity should also be a number entry to match the
previous questions
- Is someone possibly running "Master" or do we rather not even dare
ask?
- "Which Ceph Manager modules" probably should have a "I do not
know"
answer, or "Not applicable" (if < Luminous), and definitely also
"Telemetry" / "Prometheus"
- Messenger type (TCP-Posix) deserves being the default, or adding a
(Default) note in case users are confused
Page 3:
- IHV -> add "Prefer not to say"
Page 4:
- "What are the use cases" -> add "Backup"
Page RBD:
- "Do you use snapshots" -> No already opens a text entry field, the
last "Why?" is perhaps redundant on that page?
Page RGW:
- That the workload choices differ across all pages is highly annoying
and will make data analysis harder ;-)
Page CephFS:
- See previous comment
- Everywhere else the environment status is before the workload question
- My comments regarding "Number of files" being unclear about which way
to round have not been addressed. I'd suggest to add a "< " in front
of the fields instead of a "~" to turn them into ranges.
Thanks!,
Lars
--
——————————————————
Matthias Muench
Senior Specialist Solution Architect
EMEA Storage Specialist
matthias.muench(a)redhat.com
Phone: +49-160-92654111
Red Hat GmbH
Werner-von-Siemens-Ring 14
85630 Grasbrunn
Germany
_______________________________________________________________________
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com · Registered seat: Grasbrunn, Commercial register:
Amtsgericht Muenchen
HRB 153243 · Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Michael O'Neill, Tom Savage, Eric
Shander
26 Nov
26 Nov
6:22 a.m.
Replies inline...
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 6:51 AM Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb(a)suse.com> wrote:
Done
> - "How do you participate in the Ceph community?"
> - Add "Member of Ceph Foundation" as an answer ;-)
Done
> - The country list is intimidating; is there any way with Zoho to make
> this a drop down selection or tag cloud? (This is purely visual)
I was not able to find another input option. We could do a multiline text
field and have the responder type one on each line.
> Page 2:
> - Total usable capacity should also be a number entry to match the
> previous questions
Done
> - Is someone possibly running "Master" or do we rather not even dare
> ask?
I made it an option in the release question.
> - "Which Ceph Manager modules" probably should have a "I do not
know"
> answer, or "Not applicable" (if < Luminous), and definitely also
> "Telemetry" / "Prometheus"
Done
> - Messenger type (TCP-Posix) deserves being the default, or adding a
> (Default) note in case users are confused
Done
> Page 3:
> - IHV -> add "Prefer not to say"
Done
Page 4:
> - "What are the use cases" -> add "Backup"
Done
> Page RBD:
> - "Do you use snapshots" -> No already opens a text entry field, the
> last "Why?" is perhaps redundant on that page?
Done
> Page RGW:
> - That the workload choices differ across all pages is highly annoying
> and will make data analysis harder ;-)
Done
> Page CephFS:
> - See previous comment
Done
> - Everywhere else the environment status is
before the workload question
I removed the general one and added a match question/answers to each
component page.
- My comments regarding "Number of files" being unclear about which way
> to round have not been addressed. I'd suggest to add a "< " in
front
> of the fields instead of a "~" to turn them into ranges.
Done
--
Mike Perez
he/him
Ceph Community Manager
M: +1-951-572-2633
494C 5D25 2968 D361 65FB 3829 94BC D781 ADA8 8AEA
@Thingee <https://twitter.com/thingee> Thingee
<https://www.linkedin.com/thingee> <https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc <https://www.redhat.com
On 2019-11-08T11:48:39, Mike Perez
<miperez(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Sage just shared the link to the survey on Zoho. Thanks!
Minor feedback (sorry about that, some things only become clear seeing
the actual forms) that'd be nice to address but are optional:
Page 1:
- "Is telemetry enabled in your cluster*s*" (might have more than one)
And then also add "Partially" as an answer.
I'm not sure if it would be useful to capture multiple answers here. Can
you elaborate?
- Can we had the "If not" sections unless folks have not picked
"Yes"?
2:04 p.m.
On 2019-11-25T16:52:53, Mike Perez <miperez(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Perfect, thanks!
Well, we are asking about multiple clusters in the rest of the survey,
and they may be at different versions, or in different environments.
Answering "Yes/No" doesn't fully capture the possible state, and how to
proceed in that case is unclear. I'd add it just for completeness.
(But looking at the data analysis later, if someone answered
"partially", "Not available in version X", and then flagged, say,
Luminous/Nautilus, one might think that this validates the effort of
backporting.)
No, that's fine. I was just wondering, no reason to hold the survey
back.
This looks good to roll out now from my PoV! Thanks for being so patient
with my nitpicking, I really appreciate that.
Regards,
Lars
--
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
"Architects should open possibilities and not determine everything." (Ueli
Zbinden)
Page 1:
- "Is telemetry enabled in your cluster*s*" (might have more than one)
And then also add "Partially" as an answer.
I'm not sure if it
would be useful to capture multiple answers here. Can
you elaborate? - The country
list is intimidating; is there any way with Zoho to make
this a drop down selection or tag cloud? (This is purely visual)
I was not able
to find another input option. We could do a multiline text
field and have the responder type one on each line.
28 Nov
28 Nov
midnight
Thanks everyone for the feedback. I'm pleased to announce the survey is now
live:
https://ceph.io/user-survey/
https://lists.ceph.io/hyperkitty/list/ceph-users@ceph.io/thread/XTIAIA427G7…
On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 12:36 AM Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb(a)suse.com> wrote:
On 2019-11-25T16:52:53, Mike Perez
<miperez(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Perfect, thanks!
Well, we are asking about multiple clusters in the rest of the survey,
and they may be at different versions, or in different environments.
Answering "Yes/No" doesn't fully capture the possible state, and how to
proceed in that case is unclear. I'd add it just for completeness.
(But looking at the data analysis later, if someone answered
"partially", "Not available in version X", and then flagged, say,
Luminous/Nautilus, one might think that this validates the effort of
backporting.)
No, that's fine. I was just wondering, no reason to hold the survey
back.
This looks good to roll out now from my PoV! Thanks for being so patient
with my nitpicking, I really appreciate that.
Regards,
Lars
--
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah, HRB
21284 (AG Nürnberg)
"Architects should open possibilities and not determine everything." (Ueli
Zbinden)
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev(a)ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave(a)ceph.io
--
Mike Perez
he/him
Ceph Community Manager
M: +1-951-572-2633
494C 5D25 2968 D361 65FB 3829 94BC D781 ADA8 8AEA
@Thingee <https://twitter.com/thingee> Thingee
<https://www.linkedin.com/thingee> <https://www.facebook.com/RedHatInc>
<https://www.redhat.com>
Page 1:
- "Is telemetry enabled in your cluster*s*" (might have more than one)
And then also add "Partially" as an answer.
I'm not sure if it
would be useful to capture multiple answers here. Can
you elaborate? - The
country list is intimidating; is there any way with Zoho to make
this a drop down selection or tag cloud? (This is purely visual)
I was not able
to find another input option. We could do a multiline text
field and have the responder type one on each line.
1613
days inactive
1670
days old
18 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Bryan Stillwell -
Ilya Dryomov -
Lars Marowsky-Bree -
Liu, Changcheng -
Matthew Vernon -
Matthias Muench -
Mike Perez -
Sage Weil