[ceph-users] Re: cephadm does not redeploy OSD
Here you have.
So on the log when cephadm gets the inventory:
Found inventory for host [Device(path=/
Device(path=/dev/nvme2n1, lvs=[{'cluster_fsid':
'11b47c57-5e7f-44c0-8b19-ddd801a89435', 'cluster_name': 'ceph', 'db_uuid':
'irQUVH-txAO-fh3p-tkEj-ZoAH-p7lI-HcHOJp', 'name':
'osd-db-75f820d1-1597-4894-88d5-e1f21e0425a6', 'osd_fsid':
'1abbad8e-9053-4335-8673-7f1c7832b7b0', 'osd_id': '35', 'osdspec_affinity':
'spec-a', 'type': 'db'},
And then when I have the list of disks, with different filters and telling if
the disk is taken or not:
[DBG] : /dev/sde. is already used in spec spec-a, skipping it.
But I could confirm that globally the nvme for db was taken into account.
Found drive selection DeviceSelection(data devices=['/dev/sda', '/dev/sdb',
'/dev/sdc', '/dev/sdd', '/dev/sdf', '/dev/sdg', '/dev/sdh', '/dev/sdj',
'/dev/sdj', '/dev/sdk', '/dev/sdl'], wal_devices=[], db
devices=['/dev/nvme2n1'], journal devices=[]
And then I saw cephadm apply spec on all nodes except:
skipping apply of node05 on
DriveGroupSpec.from_json(yaml.safe_load('''service_type:
---
service_type: osd
service_id: spec-b
placement:
label: osds
spec:
data_devices:
rotational: 1
encrypted: true
db_devices:
size: '1TB:2TB' db_slots: 1
''')) (no change)
And now I can see both my disks on spec-b when cephadm check the disk inventory:
[DBG] : /dev/sde is already used in spec spec-b, skipping it.
...
[DBG] : /dev/sdk is already used in spec spec-b, skipping it.
As I said in my previous e-mail, I am not sure this was the reason why, as I
did not found any clear messages saying the db_device was ignored. And I did
not tried to replicate this behavior yet.
So yeah, I fixed my issue, but not sure if I it was just luck or not.
Luis Domingues
Proton AG
--- Original Message ---
On Wednesday, July 19th, 2023 at 22:04, Adam King wrote:
> > When looking on the very verbous cephadm logs, it seemed that cephadm was
> > just skipping my node, with a message saying that a node was already part
> > of another spec.
>
>
> If you have it, would you mind sharing what this message was? I'm still not
> totally sure what happened here.
>
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 10:15 AM Luis Domingues luis.doming...@proton.ch
>
> wrote:
>
> > So good news, I was not hit by the bug you mention on this thread.
> >
> > What happened, (apparently, I did not tried to replicated it yet) is that
> > I had another OSD (let call it OSD.1) using the db device, but that was
> > part of an old spec. (let call it spec-a). And the OSD (OSD.2) I removed
> > should be detected as part of spec-b. The difference between them was just
> > the name and the placement, using labels instead of hostname.
> >
> > When looking on the very verbous cephadm logs, it seemed that cephadm was
> > just skipping my node, with a message saying that a node was already part
> > of another spec.
> >
> > I purged OSD.1 with --replace and --zap, and once disks where empty and
> > ready to go, cephamd just added back OSD.1 and OSD.2 using the db_device as
> > specified.
> >
> > I do not know if this is the intended behavior, or if I was just lucky,
> > but all my OSDs are back to the cluster.
> >
> > Luis Domingues
> > Proton AG
> >
> > --- Original Message ---
> > On Tuesday, July 18th, 2023 at 18:32, Luis Domingues <
> > luis.doming...@proton.ch> wrote:
> >
> > > That part looks quite good:
> > >
> > > "available": false,
> > > "ceph_device": true,
> > > "created": "2023-07-18T16:01:16.715487Z",
> > > "device_id": "SAMSUNG MZPLJ1T6HBJR-7_S55JNG0R600354",
> > > "human_readable_type": "ssd",
> > > "lsm_data": {},
> > > "lvs": [
> > > {
> > > "cluster_fsid": "11b47c57-5e7f-44c0-8b19-ddd801a89435",
> > > "cluster_name": "ceph",
> > > "db_uuid": "CUMgp7-Uscn-ASLo-bh14-7Sxe-80GE-EcywDb",
> > > "name": "osd-block-db-5cb8edda-30f9-539f-b4c5-dbe420927911",
> > > "osd_fsid": "089894cf-1782-4a3a-8ac0-9dd043f80c71",
> > > "osd_id": "7",
> > > "osdspec_affinity": "",
> > > "type": "db"
> > > },
> > > {
> > >
> > > I forgot to mention that the cluster was initially deployed with
> > > ceph-ansible and adopted by cephadm.
> > >
> > > Luis Domingues
> > > Proton AG
> > >
> > > --- Original Message ---
> > > On Tuesday, July 18th, 2023 at 18:15, Adam King adk...@redhat.com wrote:
> > >
> > > > in the "ceph orch device ls --format json-pretty" output, in the blob
> > > > for
> > > > that specific device, is the "ceph_device" field set? There was a bug
> > > > where
> > > > it wouldn't be set at all (https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/57100) and
> > > > it
> > > > would make it so you couldn't use a device serving as a db device for
> > > > any
> > > > further OSDs, unless the device was fully cleaned out (so it is no
> > > > longer
> > > > serving as a db device). The "ceph_device" field is meant to be our
> > > > way of
> > > > knowing "yes there are LVM partitions here, but they're our partitions
> > > > for
> > > > ceph stuff, so we can still use the device"
[ceph-users] Re: cephadm does not redeploy OSD
>
> When looking on the very verbous cephadm logs, it seemed that cephadm was
> just skipping my node, with a message saying that a node was already part
> of another spec.
>
If you have it, would you mind sharing what this message was? I'm still not
totally sure what happened here.
On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 10:15 AM Luis Domingues
wrote:
> So good news, I was not hit by the bug you mention on this thread.
>
> What happened, (apparently, I did not tried to replicated it yet) is that
> I had another OSD (let call it OSD.1) using the db device, but that was
> part of an old spec. (let call it spec-a). And the OSD (OSD.2) I removed
> should be detected as part of spec-b. The difference between them was just
> the name and the placement, using labels instead of hostname.
>
> When looking on the very verbous cephadm logs, it seemed that cephadm was
> just skipping my node, with a message saying that a node was already part
> of another spec.
>
> I purged OSD.1 with --replace and --zap, and once disks where empty and
> ready to go, cephamd just added back OSD.1 and OSD.2 using the db_device as
> specified.
>
> I do not know if this is the intended behavior, or if I was just lucky,
> but all my OSDs are back to the cluster.
>
> Luis Domingues
> Proton AG
>
>
> --- Original Message ---
> On Tuesday, July 18th, 2023 at 18:32, Luis Domingues <
> luis.doming...@proton.ch> wrote:
>
>
> > That part looks quite good:
> >
> > "available": false,
> > "ceph_device": true,
> > "created": "2023-07-18T16:01:16.715487Z",
> > "device_id": "SAMSUNG MZPLJ1T6HBJR-7_S55JNG0R600354",
> > "human_readable_type": "ssd",
> > "lsm_data": {},
> > "lvs": [
> > {
> > "cluster_fsid": "11b47c57-5e7f-44c0-8b19-ddd801a89435",
> > "cluster_name": "ceph",
> > "db_uuid": "CUMgp7-Uscn-ASLo-bh14-7Sxe-80GE-EcywDb",
> > "name": "osd-block-db-5cb8edda-30f9-539f-b4c5-dbe420927911",
> > "osd_fsid": "089894cf-1782-4a3a-8ac0-9dd043f80c71",
> > "osd_id": "7",
> > "osdspec_affinity": "",
> > "type": "db"
> > },
> > {
> >
> > I forgot to mention that the cluster was initially deployed with
> ceph-ansible and adopted by cephadm.
> >
> > Luis Domingues
> > Proton AG
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- Original Message ---
> > On Tuesday, July 18th, 2023 at 18:15, Adam King adk...@redhat.com wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > in the "ceph orch device ls --format json-pretty" output, in the blob
> for
> > > that specific device, is the "ceph_device" field set? There was a bug
> where
> > > it wouldn't be set at all (https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/57100) and
> it
> > > would make it so you couldn't use a device serving as a db device for
> any
> > > further OSDs, unless the device was fully cleaned out (so it is no
> longer
> > > serving as a db device). The "ceph_device" field is meant to be our
> way of
> > > knowing "yes there are LVM partitions here, but they're our partitions
> for
> > > ceph stuff, so we can still use the device" and without it (or with it
> just
> > > being broken, as in the tracker) redeploying OSDs that used the device
> for
> > > its DB wasn't working as we don't know if those LVs imply its our
> device or
> > > has LVs for some other purpose. I had thought this was fixed already in
> > > 16.2.13 but it sounds too similar to what you're seeing not to
> consider it.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 10:53 AM Luis Domingues
> luis.doming...@proton.ch
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > We are running a ceph cluster managed with cephadm v16.2.13.
> Recently we
> > > > needed to change a disk, and we replaced it with:
> > > >
> > > > ceph orch osd rm 37 --replace.
> > > >
> > > > It worked fine, the disk was drained and the OSD marked as destroy.
> > > >
> > > > However, after changing the disk, no OSD was created. Looking to the
> db
> > > > device, the partition for db for OSD 37 was still there. So we
> destroyed it
> > > > using:
> > > > ceph-volume lvm zap --osd-id=37 --destroy.
> > > >
> > > > But we still have no OSD redeployed.
> > > > Here we have our spec:
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > service_type: osd
> > > > service_id: osd-hdd
> > > > placement:
> > > > label: osds
> > > > spec:
> > > > data_devices:
> > > > rotational: 1
> > > > encrypted: true
> > > > db_devices:
> > > > size: '1TB:2TB' db_slots: 12
> > > >
> > > > And the disk looks good:
> > > >
> > > > HOST PATH TYPE DEVICE ID SIZE AVAILABLE REFRESHED REJECT REASONS
> > > > node05 /dev/nvme2n1 ssd SAMSUNG MZPLJ1T6HBJR-7_S55JNG0R600357
> 1600G
> > > > 12m ago LVM detected, locked
> > > >
> > > > node05 /dev/sdk hdd SEAGATE_ST1NM0206_ZA21G217C7240KPF 10.0T
> Yes
> > > > 12m ago
> > > >
> > > > And VG on db_device looks to have enough space:
> > > > ceph-33b06f1a-f6f6-57cf-9ca8-6e4aa81caae0 1 11 0 wz--n- <1.46t
> 173.91g
> > > >
> > > > If I remove the db_devices and db_slots from the specs, and do a dry
> run,
> > > > the orchestrator seems to see the new disk as available:
> > > >
> > > > ceph orch apply -i osd_specs.yml --dry-run
> > > >
[ceph-users] Re: cephadm does not redeploy OSD
So good news, I was not hit by the bug you mention on this thread.
What happened, (apparently, I did not tried to replicated it yet) is that I had
another OSD (let call it OSD.1) using the db device, but that was part of an
old spec. (let call it spec-a). And the OSD (OSD.2) I removed should be
detected as part of spec-b. The difference between them was just the name and
the placement, using labels instead of hostname.
When looking on the very verbous cephadm logs, it seemed that cephadm was just
skipping my node, with a message saying that a node was already part of another
spec.
I purged OSD.1 with --replace and --zap, and once disks where empty and ready
to go, cephamd just added back OSD.1 and OSD.2 using the db_device as specified.
I do not know if this is the intended behavior, or if I was just lucky, but all
my OSDs are back to the cluster.
Luis Domingues
Proton AG
--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, July 18th, 2023 at 18:32, Luis Domingues
wrote:
> That part looks quite good:
>
> "available": false,
> "ceph_device": true,
> "created": "2023-07-18T16:01:16.715487Z",
> "device_id": "SAMSUNG MZPLJ1T6HBJR-7_S55JNG0R600354",
> "human_readable_type": "ssd",
> "lsm_data": {},
> "lvs": [
> {
> "cluster_fsid": "11b47c57-5e7f-44c0-8b19-ddd801a89435",
> "cluster_name": "ceph",
> "db_uuid": "CUMgp7-Uscn-ASLo-bh14-7Sxe-80GE-EcywDb",
> "name": "osd-block-db-5cb8edda-30f9-539f-b4c5-dbe420927911",
> "osd_fsid": "089894cf-1782-4a3a-8ac0-9dd043f80c71",
> "osd_id": "7",
> "osdspec_affinity": "",
> "type": "db"
> },
> {
>
> I forgot to mention that the cluster was initially deployed with ceph-ansible
> and adopted by cephadm.
>
> Luis Domingues
> Proton AG
>
>
>
>
> --- Original Message ---
> On Tuesday, July 18th, 2023 at 18:15, Adam King adk...@redhat.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > in the "ceph orch device ls --format json-pretty" output, in the blob for
> > that specific device, is the "ceph_device" field set? There was a bug where
> > it wouldn't be set at all (https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/57100) and it
> > would make it so you couldn't use a device serving as a db device for any
> > further OSDs, unless the device was fully cleaned out (so it is no longer
> > serving as a db device). The "ceph_device" field is meant to be our way of
> > knowing "yes there are LVM partitions here, but they're our partitions for
> > ceph stuff, so we can still use the device" and without it (or with it just
> > being broken, as in the tracker) redeploying OSDs that used the device for
> > its DB wasn't working as we don't know if those LVs imply its our device or
> > has LVs for some other purpose. I had thought this was fixed already in
> > 16.2.13 but it sounds too similar to what you're seeing not to consider it.
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 10:53 AM Luis Domingues luis.doming...@proton.ch
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > We are running a ceph cluster managed with cephadm v16.2.13. Recently we
> > > needed to change a disk, and we replaced it with:
> > >
> > > ceph orch osd rm 37 --replace.
> > >
> > > It worked fine, the disk was drained and the OSD marked as destroy.
> > >
> > > However, after changing the disk, no OSD was created. Looking to the db
> > > device, the partition for db for OSD 37 was still there. So we destroyed
> > > it
> > > using:
> > > ceph-volume lvm zap --osd-id=37 --destroy.
> > >
> > > But we still have no OSD redeployed.
> > > Here we have our spec:
> > >
> > > ---
> > > service_type: osd
> > > service_id: osd-hdd
> > > placement:
> > > label: osds
> > > spec:
> > > data_devices:
> > > rotational: 1
> > > encrypted: true
> > > db_devices:
> > > size: '1TB:2TB' db_slots: 12
> > >
> > > And the disk looks good:
> > >
> > > HOST PATH TYPE DEVICE ID SIZE AVAILABLE REFRESHED REJECT REASONS
> > > node05 /dev/nvme2n1 ssd SAMSUNG MZPLJ1T6HBJR-7_S55JNG0R600357 1600G
> > > 12m ago LVM detected, locked
> > >
> > > node05 /dev/sdk hdd SEAGATE_ST1NM0206_ZA21G217C7240KPF 10.0T Yes
> > > 12m ago
> > >
> > > And VG on db_device looks to have enough space:
> > > ceph-33b06f1a-f6f6-57cf-9ca8-6e4aa81caae0 1 11 0 wz--n- <1.46t 173.91g
> > >
> > > If I remove the db_devices and db_slots from the specs, and do a dry run,
> > > the orchestrator seems to see the new disk as available:
> > >
> > > ceph orch apply -i osd_specs.yml --dry-run
> > > WARNING! Dry-Runs are snapshots of a certain point in time and are bound
> > > to the current inventory setup. If any of these conditions change, the
> > > preview will be invalid. Please make sure to have a minimal
> > > timeframe between planning and applying the specs.
> > >
> > > SERVICESPEC PREVIEWS
> > >
> > > +-+--++-+
> > > |SERVICE |NAME |ADD_TO |REMOVE_FROM |
> > > +-+--++-+
> > > +-+--++-+
> > >
> > > OSDSPEC PREVIEWS
> > >
[ceph-users] Re: cephadm does not redeploy OSD
That part looks quite good:
"available": false,
"ceph_device": true,
"created": "2023-07-18T16:01:16.715487Z",
"device_id": "SAMSUNG MZPLJ1T6HBJR-7_S55JNG0R600354",
"human_readable_type": "ssd",
"lsm_data": {},
"lvs": [
{
"cluster_fsid": "11b47c57-5e7f-44c0-8b19-ddd801a89435",
"cluster_name": "ceph",
"db_uuid": "CUMgp7-Uscn-ASLo-bh14-7Sxe-80GE-EcywDb",
"name": "osd-block-db-5cb8edda-30f9-539f-b4c5-dbe420927911",
"osd_fsid": "089894cf-1782-4a3a-8ac0-9dd043f80c71",
"osd_id": "7",
"osdspec_affinity": "",
"type": "db"
},
{
I forgot to mention that the cluster was initially deployed with ceph-ansible
and adopted by cephadm.
Luis Domingues
Proton AG
--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, July 18th, 2023 at 18:15, Adam King wrote:
> in the "ceph orch device ls --format json-pretty" output, in the blob for
> that specific device, is the "ceph_device" field set? There was a bug where
> it wouldn't be set at all (https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/57100) and it
> would make it so you couldn't use a device serving as a db device for any
> further OSDs, unless the device was fully cleaned out (so it is no longer
> serving as a db device). The "ceph_device" field is meant to be our way of
> knowing "yes there are LVM partitions here, but they're our partitions for
> ceph stuff, so we can still use the device" and without it (or with it just
> being broken, as in the tracker) redeploying OSDs that used the device for
> its DB wasn't working as we don't know if those LVs imply its our device or
> has LVs for some other purpose. I had thought this was fixed already in
> 16.2.13 but it sounds too similar to what you're seeing not to consider it.
>
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 10:53 AM Luis Domingues luis.doming...@proton.ch
>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > We are running a ceph cluster managed with cephadm v16.2.13. Recently we
> > needed to change a disk, and we replaced it with:
> >
> > ceph orch osd rm 37 --replace.
> >
> > It worked fine, the disk was drained and the OSD marked as destroy.
> >
> > However, after changing the disk, no OSD was created. Looking to the db
> > device, the partition for db for OSD 37 was still there. So we destroyed it
> > using:
> > ceph-volume lvm zap --osd-id=37 --destroy.
> >
> > But we still have no OSD redeployed.
> > Here we have our spec:
> >
> > ---
> > service_type: osd
> > service_id: osd-hdd
> > placement:
> > label: osds
> > spec:
> > data_devices:
> > rotational: 1
> > encrypted: true
> > db_devices:
> > size: '1TB:2TB' db_slots: 12
> >
> > And the disk looks good:
> >
> > HOST PATH TYPE DEVICE ID SIZE AVAILABLE REFRESHED REJECT REASONS
> > node05 /dev/nvme2n1 ssd SAMSUNG MZPLJ1T6HBJR-7_S55JNG0R600357 1600G
> > 12m ago LVM detected, locked
> >
> > node05 /dev/sdk hdd SEAGATE_ST1NM0206_ZA21G217C7240KPF 10.0T Yes
> > 12m ago
> >
> > And VG on db_device looks to have enough space:
> > ceph-33b06f1a-f6f6-57cf-9ca8-6e4aa81caae0 1 11 0 wz--n- <1.46t 173.91g
> >
> > If I remove the db_devices and db_slots from the specs, and do a dry run,
> > the orchestrator seems to see the new disk as available:
> >
> > ceph orch apply -i osd_specs.yml --dry-run
> > WARNING! Dry-Runs are snapshots of a certain point in time and are bound
> > to the current inventory setup. If any of these conditions change, the
> > preview will be invalid. Please make sure to have a minimal
> > timeframe between planning and applying the specs.
> >
> > SERVICESPEC PREVIEWS
> >
> > +-+--++-+
> > |SERVICE |NAME |ADD_TO |REMOVE_FROM |
> > +-+--++-+
> > +-+--++-+
> >
> > OSDSPEC PREVIEWS
> >
> > +-+-+-+--++-+
> > |SERVICE |NAME |HOST |DATA |DB |WAL |
> > +-+-+-+--++-+
> > |osd |osd-hdd |node05 |/dev/sdk |- |- |
> > +-+-+-+--++-+
> >
> > But as soon as I add db_devices back, the orchestrator is happy as it is,
> > like there is nothing to do:
> >
> > ceph orch apply -i osd_specs.yml --dry-run
> > WARNING! Dry-Runs are snapshots of a certain point in time and are bound
> > to the current inventory setup. If any of these conditions change, the
> > preview will be invalid. Please make sure to have a minimal
> > timeframe between planning and applying the specs.
> >
> > SERVICESPEC PREVIEWS
> >
> > +-+--++-+
> > |SERVICE |NAME |ADD_TO |REMOVE_FROM |
> > +-+--++-+
> > +-+--++-+
> >
> > OSDSPEC PREVIEWS
> >
[ceph-users] Re: cephadm does not redeploy OSD
in the "ceph orch device ls --format json-pretty" output, in the blob for that specific device, is the "ceph_device" field set? There was a bug where it wouldn't be set at all (https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/57100) and it would make it so you couldn't use a device serving as a db device for any further OSDs, unless the device was fully cleaned out (so it is no longer serving as a db device). The "ceph_device" field is meant to be our way of knowing "yes there are LVM partitions here, but they're our partitions for ceph stuff, so we can still use the device" and without it (or with it just being broken, as in the tracker) redeploying OSDs that used the device for its DB wasn't working as we don't know if those LVs imply its our device or has LVs for some other purpose. I had thought this was fixed already in 16.2.13 but it sounds too similar to what you're seeing not to consider it. On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 10:53 AM Luis Domingues wrote: > Hi, > > We are running a ceph cluster managed with cephadm v16.2.13. Recently we > needed to change a disk, and we replaced it with: > > ceph orch osd rm 37 --replace. > > It worked fine, the disk was drained and the OSD marked as destroy. > > However, after changing the disk, no OSD was created. Looking to the db > device, the partition for db for OSD 37 was still there. So we destroyed it > using: > ceph-volume lvm zap --osd-id=37 --destroy. > > But we still have no OSD redeployed. > Here we have our spec: > > --- > service_type: osd > service_id: osd-hdd > placement: > label: osds > spec: > data_devices: > rotational: 1 > encrypted: true > db_devices: > size: '1TB:2TB' db_slots: 12 > > And the disk looks good: > > HOST PATH TYPE DEVICE ID SIZE AVAILABLE REFRESHED REJECT REASONS > node05 /dev/nvme2n1 ssd SAMSUNG MZPLJ1T6HBJR-7_S55JNG0R600357 1600G > 12m ago LVM detected, locked > > node05 /dev/sdk hdd SEAGATE_ST1NM0206_ZA21G217C7240KPF 10.0T Yes > 12m ago > > And VG on db_device looks to have enough space: > ceph-33b06f1a-f6f6-57cf-9ca8-6e4aa81caae0 1 11 0 wz--n- <1.46t 173.91g > > If I remove the db_devices and db_slots from the specs, and do a dry run, > the orchestrator seems to see the new disk as available: > > ceph orch apply -i osd_specs.yml --dry-run > WARNING! Dry-Runs are snapshots of a certain point in time and are bound > to the current inventory setup. If any of these conditions change, the > preview will be invalid. Please make sure to have a minimal > timeframe between planning and applying the specs. > > SERVICESPEC PREVIEWS > > +-+--++-+ > |SERVICE |NAME |ADD_TO |REMOVE_FROM | > +-+--++-+ > +-+--++-+ > > OSDSPEC PREVIEWS > > +-+-+-+--++-+ > |SERVICE |NAME |HOST |DATA |DB |WAL | > +-+-+-+--++-+ > |osd |osd-hdd |node05 |/dev/sdk |- |- | > +-+-+-+--++-+ > > But as soon as I add db_devices back, the orchestrator is happy as it is, > like there is nothing to do: > > ceph orch apply -i osd_specs.yml --dry-run > WARNING! Dry-Runs are snapshots of a certain point in time and are bound > to the current inventory setup. If any of these conditions change, the > preview will be invalid. Please make sure to have a minimal > timeframe between planning and applying the specs. > > SERVICESPEC PREVIEWS > > +-+--++-+ > |SERVICE |NAME |ADD_TO |REMOVE_FROM | > +-+--++-+ > +-+--++-+ > > OSDSPEC PREVIEWS > > +-+--+--+--++-+ > |SERVICE |NAME |HOST |DATA |DB |WAL | > +-+--+--+--++-+ > > I do not know why ceph will not use this disk, and I do not know where to > look. It seems logs are not saying anything. And the weirdest thing, > another disk was replaced on the same machine, and it went without any > issues. > > Luis Domingues > Proton AG > ___ > 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
