From 99572e211549ca5ee4fe077fa1380365428fb3e3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: chrone Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2018 23:46:21 +0700 Subject: [PATCH] doc: Fix EC overhead example for 3+2 profile The EC 3+2 example used to show 40% overhead where it should be 67%. This might confuse new EC user to calculate the correct EC 3+2 profile overhead. Signed-off-by: Charles Alva --- doc/rados/operations/erasure-code.rst | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/doc/rados/operations/erasure-code.rst b/doc/rados/operations/erasure-code.rst index a85f5678b38..e4a8d532b78 100644 --- a/doc/rados/operations/erasure-code.rst +++ b/doc/rados/operations/erasure-code.rst @@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ to be created and all objects from the previous pool moved to the new. The most important parameters of the profile are *K*, *M* and *crush-failure-domain* because they define the storage overhead and the data durability. For instance, if the desired architecture must -sustain the loss of two racks with a storage overhead of 40% overhead, +sustain the loss of two racks with a storage overhead of 67% overhead, the following profile can be defined:: $ ceph osd erasure-code-profile set myprofile \ -- 2.39.5