I don´t have the largest data farm around, but I do have a fairly
eclectic set of files and directories.
I have seen no differences in cephfs moving to squid, though I do have
some issues that are common to Pacific and Squid.
1. cephs cannot gracefully handle clients who go off/online.
Specifically sleeping clients. It causes ceph resources to leak and ceph
to whine. The ceph-side resources have to be closed out manually.
2. I have some clients where I've tried using ceph-nfs where some
resources do not appear properly. In particular, files that return no
data even though in cephfs itself the files are not empty.
Some recent posts on the list here have potential to maybe fix #2, but I
haven't tried them yet.
For permanent cephfs native clients I have no complaints.
Tim
On 9/17/25 09:37, William David Edwards wrote:
Hi,
For those running CephFS on Squid: how mature is the release in your
experience? I'm especially interested in those using CephFS in a
shared hosting scenario, with many directories containing many small
files.
I'm extra wary of new releases nowadays, as we've ran into several
production-impacting Ceph bugs in the past months post-upgrade, across
clusters. (Most notably, OSDs failing causing the MDS to OOM (17.2.7
-> 17.2.8) [1], and major performance issues after upgrading to Reef
caused by the aligned 64k blocks constraint [2] (RBD though, not
CephFS).)
With kind regards,
William David Edwards
[1]: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/69764
[2]: https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/54772
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
