All, In looking at the options for setting the default pg autoscale option, I notice that there is a global option setting and a per-pool option setting. It seems that the options at the pool level are off, warn, and on. The same, I assume for the global setting.
Is there a way to get rid of the per-pool setting and set the pool to honor the global setting? I think I'm looking for 'off, warn, on, or global'. It seems that once the per-pool option is set for all of one's pools, the global value is irrelevant. This also implies that in a circumstance where one would want to temporarily suspend autoscaling it would be required to modify the setting for each pool and then to modify it back afterward. Thoughts? Thanks -Dave -- Dave Hall Binghamton University kdh...@binghamton.edu On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 1:44 PM Anthony D'Atri <anthony.da...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes the PG autoscalar has a way of reducing PG count way too far. There’s > a claim that it’s better in Pacific, but I tend to recommend disabling it > and calculating / setting pg_num manually. > > > On Mar 29, 2021, at 9:06 AM, Dave Hall <kdh...@binghamton.edu> wrote: > > > > Eugen, > > > > I didn't really think my cluster was eating itself, but I also didn't > want > > to be in denial. > > > > Regarding the autoscaler, I really thought that it only went up - I > didn't > > expect that it would decrease the number of PGs. Plus, I thought I had > it > > turned off. I see now that it's off globally but enabled for this > > particular pool. Also, I see that the target PG count is lower than the > > current. > > > > I guess you learn something new every day. > > > > -Dave > > > > -- > > Dave Hall > > Binghamton University > > kdh...@binghamton.edu > > 607-760-2328 (Cell) > > 607-777-4641 (Office) > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 7:52 AM Eugen Block <ebl...@nde.ag> wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> that sounds like the pg_autoscaler is doing its work. Check with: > >> > >> ceph osd pool autoscale-status > >> > >> I don't think ceph is eating itself or that you're losing data. ;-) > >> > >> > >> Zitat von Dave Hall <kdh...@binghamton.edu>: > >> > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> About 3 weeks ago I added a node and increased the number of OSDs in my > >>> cluster from 24 to 32, and then marked one old OSD down because it was > >>> frequently crashing. . > >>> > >>> After adding the new OSDs the PG count jumped fairly dramatically, but > >> ever > >>> since, amidst a continuous low level of rebalancing, the number of PGs > >> has > >>> gradually decreased to less by 25% from it's max value. Although I > don't > >>> have specific notes, my perception is that the current number of PGs is > >>> actually lower than it was before I added OSDs. > >>> > >>> So what's going on here? It is possible to imagine that my cluster is > >>> slowly eating itself, and that I'm about to lose 200TB of data. It's > also > >>> possible to imagine that this is all due to the gradual optimization of > >> the > >>> pools. > >>> > >>> Note that the primary pool is an EC 8 + 2 containing about 124TB. > >>> > >>> Thanks. > >>> > >>> -Dave > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Dave Hall > >>> Binghamton University > >>> kdh...@binghamton.edu > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io > >>> To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io > >> To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io > > To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io > > _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io
