[ceph-users] RadosGW Performance on Copy
Performance related data I found so far on RadosGW don't contain anything on Copy operation. Can anyone comment on the Copy operation? Is it basically just a GET + INSERT? Thanks, Eric ___ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
[ceph-users] RGW: Auth error with hostname instead of IP
When I send the a RGW request with hostname (with port that is not 80), I am seeing "SignatureDoesNotMatch" error. GET / HTTP/1.1 Host: cephrgw0002s2mdw1.sendgrid.net:50680 User-Agent: Minio (linux; amd64) minio-go/2.0.4 mc/2017-04-03T18:35:01Z Authorization: AWS **REDACTED**:**REDACTED** SignatureDoesNotMatchtx00093e0c1-00593b145c-996aae1-default996aae1-default-defaultmc: However this works fine when I send it with an IP address instead. Is the hostname part of the signature? If so, how can I make it so that it will work with hostname as well? Thank you, Eric ___ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
Re: [ceph-users] Living with huge bucket sizes
Hello all, I work in the same team as Tyler here, and I can provide more info here.. The cluster is indeed an RGW cluster, with many small (100 KB) objects similar to your use case Bryan. But we have the blind bucket set up with "index_type": 1 for this particular bucket, as we wanted to avoid this bottleneck to begin with (we didn't need listing feature) Would the bucket sharding still be a problem for blind buckets? Mark, would setting logging to 20 give any insights to what threads are doing? Eric ___ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
Re: [ceph-users] osd_op_tp timeouts
I realized I sent this under wrong thread: here I am sending it again: --- Hello all, I work in the same team as Tyler here, and I can provide more info here.. The cluster is indeed an RGW cluster, with many small (100 KB) objects similar to your use case Bryan. But we have the blind bucket set up with "index_type": 1 for this particular bucket, as we wanted to avoid this bottleneck to begin with (we didn't need listing feature) Would the bucket sharding still be a problem for blind buckets? Mark, would setting logging to 20 give any insights to what threads are doing? Eric ___ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
[ceph-users] Upgrading from Luminous to Nautilus: PG State Unknown
Hi there, We are trying to upgrade a cluster in our test environment to Nautilus, and we ran into this hurdle after upgrading Mons and Mgrs. Restarting the first OSD, we noticed that ceph -s is reporting many PG's state as unknown: [root@cephosd0041 ceph]# ceph pg stat 996 pgs: 263 active+clean, 733 unknown; 71 GiB data, 364 GiB used, 11 TiB / 11 TiB avail; 340 B/s rd, 3.0 KiB/s wr, 36 op/s As far I can research this is basically MGR's reporting that it didn't receive information from OSD's, what can we do to resolve this? or is this just a red herring by any chance? Thank you, -- Eric Choi Senior Software Engineer 2 | Core Platform ___ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
[ceph-users] Using same name for rgw / beast web front end
Hi there, we have been using ceph for a few years now, it's only now that I've noticed we have been using the same name for all RGW hosts, resulting when you run ceph -s: rgw: 1 daemon active (..) despite having more than 10 RGW hosts. * What are the side effects of doing this? Is this a no-no? I can see the metrics can (ceph daemon ... perf dump) be wrong, are the metrics kept track independently (per host)? * My second question (maybe this should be a separate email!) is that comparison between Beast vs Civetweb. We only recently upgraded to Nautilus, so Beast became available as an option to us. I couldn't find any blogs / docs on comparing these 2 frontends. Is there any recommended reading or could someone give me an overview? Much appreciated! -- Eric Choi Senior Software Engineer 2 | Core Platform ___ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
Re: [ceph-users] Using same name for rgw / beast web front end
Replying to my own question: 2. Beast is not a web front end, so it would be an apple-to-orange comparison. I just couldn't find any blogs / docs about it at first (found it here: https://github.com/ceph/Beast) Still unsure about the first question.. On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 4:45 PM Eric Choi wrote: > Hi there, we have been using ceph for a few years now, it's only now that > I've noticed we have been using the same name for all RGW hosts, resulting > when you run ceph -s: > > rgw: 1 daemon active (..) > > despite having more than 10 RGW hosts. > > * What are the side effects of doing this? Is this a no-no? I can see the > metrics can (ceph daemon ... perf dump) be wrong, are the metrics kept > track independently (per host)? > > * My second question (maybe this should be a separate email!) is that > comparison between Beast vs Civetweb. We only recently upgraded to > Nautilus, so Beast became available as an option to us. I couldn't find > any blogs / docs on comparing these 2 frontends. Is there any recommended > reading or could someone give me an overview? > > Much appreciated! > > > > -- > > Eric Choi > Senior Software Engineer 2 | Core Platform > > > -- Eric Choi Senior Software Engineer 2 | Core Platform ___ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
Re: [ceph-users] Using same name for rgw / beast web front end
That clarified it thank you so much! On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:58 AM Casey Bodley wrote: > Hi Eric, > > boost::beast is a low-level c++ http protocol library that's hosted at > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/boostorg/beast__;!ewrCk7WT9Do!NranHr9vbRm-Hn46zxjyw_uw4s_fDmS2pHoR1ngtDKMIanoncHDkD2dh8Y6u$ > . Radosgw uses this library, along with > boost::asio, as the basis for its 'beast frontend'. The motivation > behind this frontend is its flexible threading model and support for > asynchronous networking. The civetweb server's thread-per-connection > model has been a major limitation for scalability. With ongoing work to > extend the asynchrony of the beast frontend into radosgw's request > processing, it'll be able to handle more concurrent requests with fewer > thread/memory resources than civetweb. > > In nautilus though, the beast frontend still has this > thread-per-connection limitation, and its performance is comparable to > civetweb's. I expect we'll make more noise about it once we're further > along with the async refactoring and start to show the real wins. I hope > that helps to clarify the situation! > > Casey > > On 9/11/19 12:56 PM, Eric Choi wrote: > > Replying to my own question: > > > > 2. Beast is not a web front end, so it would be an apple-to-orange > > comparison. I just couldn't find any blogs / docs about it at first > > (found it here: > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/ceph/Beast__;!ewrCk7WT9Do!NranHr9vbRm-Hn46zxjyw_uw4s_fDmS2pHoR1ngtDKMIanoncHDkD9F_eXWK$ > ) > > > > Still unsure about the first question.. > > > > On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 4:45 PM Eric Choi > <mailto:ec...@twilio.com>> wrote: > > > > Hi there, we have been using ceph for a few years now, it's only > > now that I've noticed we have been using the same name for all RGW > > hosts, resulting when you run ceph -s: > > > > rgw: 1 daemon active (..) > > > > despite having more than 10 RGW hosts. > > > > * What are the side effects of doing this? Is this a no-no? I can > > see the metrics can (ceph daemon ... perf dump) be wrong, are the > > metrics kept track independently (per host)? > > > > * My second question (maybe this should be a separate email!) is > > that comparison between Beast vs Civetweb. We only recently > > upgraded to Nautilus, so Beast became available as an option to > > us. I couldn't find any blogs / docs on comparing these 2 > > frontends. Is there any recommended reading or could someone give > > me an overview? > > > > Much appreciated! > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Eric Choi > > Senior Software Engineer 2 | Core Platform > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Eric Choi > > Senior Software Engineer 2 | Core Platform > > > > > > > > ___ > > ceph-users mailing list > > ceph-users@lists.ceph.com > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com__;!ewrCk7WT9Do!NranHr9vbRm-Hn46zxjyw_uw4s_fDmS2pHoR1ngtDKMIanoncHDkD1-T2l6C$ > ___ > ceph-users mailing list > ceph-users@lists.ceph.com > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com__;!ewrCk7WT9Do!NranHr9vbRm-Hn46zxjyw_uw4s_fDmS2pHoR1ngtDKMIanoncHDkD1-T2l6C$ > -- Eric Choi Senior Software Engineer 2 | Core Platform ___ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
