> IMHO this isn't the right layer for this. An admin wishing to mirror the offload >device should do so (via MD or (sigh) an HBA) and present that device in the OSD spec. >ymmv. Hello Anthony! The idea behind is to keep osds (with data on HDD) running in case of meta device goes down. For sure, my test lab with md Raid1 on 2 NS within the same NVME device is just to bring the idea and it has no sense at all in real world. In prod I mean to use, for instance, nvme0n1 and nvme1n1 united into raid1. And the problem is that ceph-volume tries to get blkid, which is obviosly none on /dev/md127. That is my intention to modify the code. >Conventional wisdom has favored instead offloading fewer OSDs to each SSD to reduce write >amp and the blast radius. Indeed, but I use fast SSD devices for wal and db. BTW, don't you like HBA's? Cuz you did sigh when mentioned HBA?:) Why? Cuz of price? _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
 |