The PGs will stay active+recovery_wait+degraded until you solve the unfound
objects issue.
You can follow this doc to look at which objects are unfound[1]  and if no
other recourse mark them lost

[1]
http://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/rados/troubleshooting/troubleshooting-pg/#unfound-objects
.

On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 5:47 AM Kevin Flöh <kevin.fl...@kit.edu> wrote:

> thank you for this idea, it has improved the situation. Nevertheless,
> there are still 2 PGs in recovery_wait. ceph -s gives me:
>
>    cluster:
>      id:     23e72372-0d44-4cad-b24f-3641b14b86f4
>      health: HEALTH_WARN
>              3/125481112 objects unfound (0.000%)
>              Degraded data redundancy: 3/497011315 objects degraded
> (0.000%), 2 pgs degraded
>
>    services:
>      mon: 3 daemons, quorum ceph-node03,ceph-node01,ceph-node02
>      mgr: ceph-node01(active), standbys: ceph-node01.etp.kit.edu
>      mds: cephfs-1/1/1 up  {0=ceph-node03.etp.kit.edu=up:active}, 3
> up:standby
>      osd: 96 osds: 96 up, 96 in
>
>    data:
>      pools:   2 pools, 4096 pgs
>      objects: 125.48M objects, 259TiB
>      usage:   370TiB used, 154TiB / 524TiB avail
>      pgs:     3/497011315 objects degraded (0.000%)
>               3/125481112 objects unfound (0.000%)
>               4083 active+clean
>               10   active+clean+scrubbing+deep
>               2    active+recovery_wait+degraded
>               1    active+clean+scrubbing
>
>    io:
>      client:   318KiB/s rd, 77.0KiB/s wr, 190op/s rd, 0op/s wr
>
>
> and ceph health detail:
>
> HEALTH_WARN 3/125481112 objects unfound (0.000%); Degraded data
> redundancy: 3/497011315 objects degraded (0.000%), 2 p
> gs degraded
> OBJECT_UNFOUND 3/125481112 objects unfound (0.000%)
>      pg 1.24c has 1 unfound objects
>      pg 1.779 has 2 unfound objects
> PG_DEGRADED Degraded data redundancy: 3/497011315 objects degraded
> (0.000%), 2 pgs degraded
>      pg 1.24c is active+recovery_wait+degraded, acting [32,4,61,36], 1
> unfound
>      pg 1.779 is active+recovery_wait+degraded, acting [50,4,77,62], 2
> unfound
>
>
> also the status changed form HEALTH_ERR to HEALTH_WARN. We also did ceph
> osd down for all OSDs of the degraded PGs. Do you have any further
> suggestions on how to proceed?
>
> On 23.05.19 11:08 vorm., Dan van der Ster wrote:
> > I think those osds (1, 11, 21, 32, ...) need a little kick to re-peer
> > their degraded PGs.
> >
> > Open a window with `watch ceph -s`, then in another window slowly do
> >
> >      ceph osd down 1
> >      # then wait a minute or so for that osd.1 to re-peer fully.
> >      ceph osd down 11
> >      ...
> >
> > Continue that for each of the osds with stuck requests, or until there
> > are no more recovery_wait/degraded PGs.
> >
> > After each `ceph osd down...`, you should expect to see several PGs
> > re-peer, and then ideally the slow requests will disappear and the
> > degraded PGs will become active+clean.
> > If anything else happens, you should stop and let us know.
> >
> >
> > -- dan
> >
> > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 10:59 AM Kevin Flöh <kevin.fl...@kit.edu> wrote:
> >> This is the current status of ceph:
> >>
> >>
> >>     cluster:
> >>       id:     23e72372-0d44-4cad-b24f-3641b14b86f4
> >>       health: HEALTH_ERR
> >>               9/125481144 objects unfound (0.000%)
> >>               Degraded data redundancy: 9/497011417 objects degraded
> >> (0.000%), 7 pgs degraded
> >>               9 stuck requests are blocked > 4096 sec. Implicated osds
> >> 1,11,21,32,43,50,65
> >>
> >>     services:
> >>       mon: 3 daemons, quorum ceph-node03,ceph-node01,ceph-node02
> >>       mgr: ceph-node01(active), standbys: ceph-node01.etp.kit.edu
> >>       mds: cephfs-1/1/1 up  {0=ceph-node03.etp.kit.edu=up:active}, 3
> >> up:standby
> >>       osd: 96 osds: 96 up, 96 in
> >>
> >>     data:
> >>       pools:   2 pools, 4096 pgs
> >>       objects: 125.48M objects, 259TiB
> >>       usage:   370TiB used, 154TiB / 524TiB avail
> >>       pgs:     9/497011417 objects degraded (0.000%)
> >>                9/125481144 objects unfound (0.000%)
> >>                4078 active+clean
> >>                11   active+clean+scrubbing+deep
> >>                7    active+recovery_wait+degraded
> >>
> >>     io:
> >>       client:   211KiB/s rd, 46.0KiB/s wr, 158op/s rd, 0op/s wr
> >>
> >> On 23.05.19 10:54 vorm., Dan van der Ster wrote:
> >>> What's the full ceph status?
> >>> Normally recovery_wait just means that the relevant osd's are busy
> >>> recovering/backfilling another PG.
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 10:53 AM Kevin Flöh <kevin.fl...@kit.edu>
> wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> we have set the PGs to recover and now they are stuck in
> active+recovery_wait+degraded and instructing them to deep-scrub does not
> change anything. Hence, the rados report is empty. Is there a way to stop
> the recovery wait to start the deep-scrub and get the output? I guess the
> recovery_wait might be caused by missing objects. Do we need to delete them
> first to get the recovery going?
> >>>>
> >>>> Kevin
> >>>>
> >>>> On 22.05.19 6:03 nachm., Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 4:31 AM Kevin Flöh <kevin.fl...@kit.edu>
> wrote:
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> thank you, it worked. The PGs are not incomplete anymore. Still we
> have
> >>>>> another problem, there are 7 PGs inconsistent and a cpeh pg repair is
> >>>>> not doing anything. I just get "instructing pg 1.5dd on osd.24 to
> >>>>> repair" and nothing happens. Does somebody know how we can get the
> PGs
> >>>>> to repair?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Kevin
> >>>> Kevin,
> >>>>
> >>>> I just fixed an inconsistent PG yesterday. You will need to figure
> out why they are inconsistent. Do these steps and then we can figure out
> how to proceed.
> >>>> 1. Do a deep-scrub on each PG that is inconsistent. (This may fix
> some of them)
> >>>> 2. Print out the inconsistent report for each inconsistent PG. `rados
> list-inconsistent-obj <PG_NUM> --format=json-pretty`
> >>>> 3. You will want to look at the error messages and see if all the
> shards have the same data.
> >>>>
> >>>> Robert LeBlanc
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> ceph-users mailing list
> >>>> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> >>>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
>
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to