Oh duh… OK, then given a 4+4 erasure coding scheme, 14400/8 is 1800, so try 2048.
-don- From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com] On Behalf Of Don Doerner Sent: 04 March, 2015 12:14 To: Kyle Hutson; Ceph Users Subject: Re: [ceph-users] New EC pool undersized In this case, that number means that there is not an OSD that can be assigned. What’s your k, m from you erasure coded pool? You’ll need approximately (14400/(k+m)) PGs, rounded up to the next power of 2… -don- From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com] On Behalf Of Kyle Hutson Sent: 04 March, 2015 12:06 To: Ceph Users Subject: [ceph-users] New EC pool undersized Last night I blew away my previous ceph configuration (this environment is pre-production) and have 0.87.1 installed. I've manually edited the crushmap so it down looks like https://dpaste.de/OLEa<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=https://dpaste.de/OLEa&k=8F5TVnBDKF32UabxXsxZiA%3D%3D%0A&r=klXZewu0kUquU7GVFsSHwpsWEaffmLRymeSfL%2FX1EJo%3D%0A&m=JSfAuDHRgKln0yM%2FQGMT3hZb3rVLUpdn2wGdV3C0Rbk%3D%0A&s=c1bd46dcd96e656554817882d7f6581903b1e3c6a50313f4bf7494acfd12b442> I currently have 144 OSDs on 8 nodes. After increasing pg_num and pgp_num to a more suitable 1024 (due to the high number of OSDs), everything looked happy. So, now I'm trying to play with an erasure-coded pool. I did: ceph osd erasure-code-profile set ec44profile k=4 m=4 ruleset-failure-domain=rack ceph osd pool create ec44pool 8192 8192 erasure ec44profile After settling for a bit 'ceph status' gives cluster 196e5eb8-d6a7-4435-907e-ea028e946923 health HEALTH_WARN 7 pgs degraded; 7 pgs stuck degraded; 7 pgs stuck unclean; 7 pgs stuck undersized; 7 pgs undersized monmap e1: 4 mons at {hobbit01=10.5.38.1:6789/0,hobbit02=10.5.38.2:6789/0,hobbit13=10.5.38.13:6789/0,hobbit14=10.5.38.14:6789/0<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://10.5.38.1:6789/0%2Chobbit02%3D10.5.38.2:6789/0%2Chobbit13%3D10.5.38.13:6789/0%2Chobbit14%3D10.5.38.14:6789/0&k=8F5TVnBDKF32UabxXsxZiA%3D%3D%0A&r=klXZewu0kUquU7GVFsSHwpsWEaffmLRymeSfL%2FX1EJo%3D%0A&m=JSfAuDHRgKln0yM%2FQGMT3hZb3rVLUpdn2wGdV3C0Rbk%3D%0A&s=6fe07b47a00235857630057e09cfb702dcddcea1d3f98d81a574020ee95dee44>}, election epoch 6, quorum 0,1,2,3 hobbit01,hobbit02,hobbit13,hobbit14 osdmap e409: 144 osds: 144 up, 144 in pgmap v6763: 12288 pgs, 2 pools, 0 bytes data, 0 objects 90598 MB used, 640 TB / 640 TB avail 7 active+undersized+degraded 12281 active+clean So to troubleshoot the undersized pgs, I issued 'ceph pg dump_stuck' ok pg_stat objects mip degr misp unf bytes log disklog state state_stamp v reported up up_primary acting acting_primary last_scrub scrub_stamp last_deep_scrub deep_scrub_stamp 1.d77 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 active+undersized+degraded 2015-03-04 11:33:57.502849 0'0 408:12 [15,95,58,73,52,31,116,2147483647] 15 [15,95,58,73,52,31,116,2147483647] 15 0'0 2015-03-04 11:33:42.100752 0'0 2015-03-04 11:33:42.100752 1.10fa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 active+undersized+degraded 2015-03-04 11:34:29.362554 0'0 408:12 [23,12,99,114,132,53,56,2147483647] 23 [23,12,99,114,132,53,56,2147483647] 23 0'0 2015-03-04 11:33:42.168571 0'0 2015-03-04 11:33:42.168571 1.1271 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 active+undersized+degraded 2015-03-04 11:33:48.795742 0'0 408:12 [135,112,69,4,22,95,2147483647,83] 135 [135,112,69,4,22,95,2147483647,83] 135 0'0 2015-03-04 11:33:42.139555 0'0 2015-03-04 11:33:42.139555 1.2b5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 active+undersized+degraded 2015-03-04 11:34:32.189738 0'0 408:12 [11,115,139,19,76,52,94,2147483647] 11 [11,115,139,19,76,52,94,2147483647] 11 0'0 2015-03-04 11:33:42.079673 0'0 2015-03-04 11:33:42.079673 1.7ae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 active+undersized+degraded 2015-03-04 11:34:26.848344 0'0 408:12 [27,5,132,119,94,56,52,2147483647] 27 [27,5,132,119,94,56,52,2147483647] 27 0'0 2015-03-04 11:33:42.109832 0'0 2015-03-04 11:33:42.109832 1.1a97 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 active+undersized+degraded 2015-03-04 11:34:25.457454 0'0 408:12 [20,53,14,54,102,118,2147483647,72] 20 [20,53,14,54,102,118,2147483647,72] 20 0'0 2015-03-04 11:33:42.833850 0'0 2015-03-04 11:33:42.833850 1.10a6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 active+undersized+degraded 2015-03-04 11:34:30.059936 0'0 408:12 [136,22,4,2147483647,72,52,101,55] 136 [136,22,4,2147483647,72,52,101,55] 136 0'0 2015-03-04 11:33:42.125871 0'0 2015-03-04 11:33:42.125871 This appears to have a number on all these (2147483647) that is way out of line from what I would expect. Thoughts? ________________________________ The information contained in this transmission may be confidential. Any disclosure, copying, or further distribution of confidential information is not permitted unless such privilege is explicitly granted in writing by Quantum. Quantum reserves the right to have electronic communications, including email and attachments, sent across its networks filtered through anti virus and spam software programs and retain such messages in order to comply with applicable data security and retention requirements. Quantum is not responsible for the proper and complete transmission of the substance of this communication or for any delay in its receipt.
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
