Bug 1382026 - [RHCS 2.0] Do not uncomment crush_location and the osd_crush_location settings
Summary: [RHCS 2.0] Do not uncomment crush_location and the osd_crush_location settings
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Ceph Storage
Classification: Red Hat
Component: Documentation
Version: 2.1
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: rc
: 2.1
Assignee: Bara Ancincova
QA Contact: ceph-qe-bugs
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-10-05 14:32 UTC by seb
Modified: 2016-11-28 09:38 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-11-28 09:38:14 UTC
Target Upstream Version:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description seb 2016-10-05 14:32:44 UTC
Description of problem:

The current documentation here: https://access.qa.redhat.com/documentation/en/red-hat-ceph-storage/2/single/installation-guide-for-red-hat-enterprise-linux#installing_red_hat_ceph_storage_using_ansible

In the section 3.2.4. Configuring Ceph OSD Settings

recommends on 3. to "Uncomment the crush_location setting and the osd_crush_location setting."

This flag should be uncommented only on a very special circonstance while playing with complex CRUSH maps.

For example, there are cases where we are collocating different devices (rotational and non-rotational drives) on the same machine and we want to separate them into different pool just as described in this article: https://www.sebastien-han.fr/blog/2014/08/25/ceph-mix-sata-and-ssd-within-the-same-box/

In this scenario you might want to force the location of some OSDs. By updating this variable osd_crush_location you can set a preferred location.

Not that this is not ideal, since this will trigger some changes into the ceph.conf, making it a bit inconsistent with what was generated, so it's NOT recommend to use this option unless you really have a unique scenario.



 

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 3 seb 2016-10-07 11:49:33 UTC
Thanks I also added a comment in the code in v1.0.8 see https://github.com/ceph/ceph-ansible/blob/master/group_vars/osds.sample#L35-L49

Comment 4 seb 2016-10-07 11:52:07 UTC
LGTM


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.