2020年12月4日(金) 9:53 Michael Thomas :
>
> On 12/3/20 6:47 PM, Satoru Takeuchi wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Could you tell me whether it's ok to remove device_health_metrics pool
> > after disabling device monitoring feature?
> >
> > I don't use device monitoring feature because I capture hardware
> >
On 12/3/20 6:47 PM, Satoru Takeuchi wrote:
Hi,
Could you tell me whether it's ok to remove device_health_metrics pool
after disabling device monitoring feature?
I don't use device monitoring feature because I capture hardware
information from other way.
However, after disabling this feature,
Hi,
Could you tell me whether it's ok to remove device_health_metrics pool
after disabling device monitoring feature?
I don't use device monitoring feature because I capture hardware
information from other way.
However, after disabling this feature, device_health_metrics pool stll
exists.
I
Hi,
Could you tell me whether read I/O is acxepted when the number of replicas
is under pool's min_size?
I read the official document and found that there is a difference of the
effect of pool's
min_size between pool's document and the pool's configuration document.
Pool's document:
I deploy a custom crush location hook on every server. This adds a new server
in the correct location without any further ado. See
https://docs.ceph.com/en/latest/rados/operations/crush-map/#custom-location-hooks
.
Best regards,
=
Frank Schilder
AIT Risø Campus
Bygning 109, rum
Hi Frank,
this values we used to reduce the recovery impact before luminous.
#reduce recovery impact
osd max backfills
osd recovery max active
osd recovery max single start
osd recovery op priority
osd recovery threads
osd backfill scan max
osd backfill scan min
I do not know how many osds and
This is what I do as well.
> You can also just use a single command:
>
> ceph osd crush add-bucket host room=
___
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io
So I fixed it but I still have no idea on root cause. Did narrow it down to
any commands being redirected to the manager. We unsuccessfully tried to get
the python debugging working for the status module so we could watch the code
path inside to see where it was hanging. I decided to take
My first question is about this metric: ceph_bluefs_read_prefetch_bytes and
I want to know what operation is related to this metric?
On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 7:49 PM Seena Fallah wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> When my cluster gets into a recovery state (adding new node) I see a huge
> read throughput on
Hi all,
When my cluster gets into a recovery state (adding new node) I see a huge
read throughput on its disks and it affects the latency! Disks are SSD and
they don't have a separate WAL/DB.
I'm using nautilus 14.2.14 and bluefs_buffered_io is false by default. When
this throughput came on my
Sorry, just tried "osd_recovery_sleep=0" (was 0.05) and the number of objects
in flight did increase dramatically:
recovery: 0 B/s, 8.64 kobjects/s
Would be nice if there was a way to set this per pool.
Best regards,
=
Frank Schilder
AIT Risø Campus
Bygning 109, rum S14
You can also just use a single command:
ceph osd crush add-bucket host room=
> 在 2020年12月4日，00:00，Francois Legrand 写道：
>
> Thank for your advices.
>
> it was exactly what I needed.
>
> Indeed, I did a :
>
> ceph osd crush add-bucket host
> ceph osd crush move room=
>
>
> But also set
Thank for your advices.
it was exactly what I needed.
Indeed, I did a :
ceph osd crush add-bucket host
ceph osd crush move room=
But also set the norecover, nobackfill and norebalance flags :-)
It worked perfectly as expected.
F.
Le 03/12/2020 à 01:50, Reed Dier a écrit :
Just to
Did this already. It doesn't change the number of objects in flight.
Best regards,
=
Frank Schilder
AIT Risø Campus
Bygning 109, rum S14
From: 胡 玮文
Sent: 03 December 2020 12:35:03
To: Frank Schilder
Cc: ceph-users@ceph.io
Subject: Re:
Indeed, I think this is yet another incarnation of the "origin of misplaced
data is no longer found"-bug.
https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/37439
https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/46847
We also experience it regularly, but I haven't found the cause yet.
Another bug that occurs when adding new OSDs
Thanks. It seems it is related to wpq implementation on how it is
organizing priorities!
I want to slow down the keys/s and I've set all the priorities to 1 for
recovery but it doesn't slow down!
On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 1:13 PM Anthony D'Atri
wrote:
>
> >> If so why the client op priority is
[root@gnosis ~]# ceph status
cluster:
id:
health: HEALTH_WARN
8283238/3566503213 objects misplaced (0.232%)
1 pools nearfull
services:
mon: 3 daemons, quorum ceph-01,ceph-02,ceph-03
mgr: ceph-02(active), standbys: ceph-03, ceph-01
mds: con-fs2-1/1/1
Hi Janne,
looked at it already. The recovery rate is unbearably slow and I would like to
increase it. The % misplaced objects is decreasing unnecessarily slow.
Best regards,
=
Frank Schilder
AIT Risø Campus
Bygning 109, rum S14
From:
Hi all,
I have the opposite problem as discussed in "slow down keys/s in recovery". I
need to increase the number of objects in flight during rebalance. It is
already all remapped PGs in state backfilling, but it looks like no more than 8
objects/sec are transferred per PG at a time. The pools
Hi,
There is a “OSD recovery priority” dialog box in web dashboard. Configurations
it will change includes:
osd_max_backfill
osd_recovery_max_active
osd_recovery_max_single_start
osd_recovery_sleep
Tune these config may helps. “High” priority corresponding to 4, 4, 4, 0,
respectively. Some of
Hi Frank,
out of curiosity, can you share the recovery rates you are seeing?
I would appreciate it, thanks!
On 12/03 09:44, Frank Schilder wrote:
> Hi Janne,
>
> looked at it already. The recovery rate is unbearably slow and I would like
> to increase it. The % misplaced objects is decreasing
>> If so why the client op priority is default 63 and recovery op is 3? This
>> means that by default recovery op is more prioritize than client op!
>
> Exactly the opposite. Client ops take priority over recovery ops. And
> various other ops have priorities as described in the document I
Den tors 3 dec. 2020 kl 10:11 skrev Frank Schilder :
> I have the opposite problem as discussed in "slow down keys/s in
> recovery". I need to increase the number of objects in flight during
> rebalance. It is already all remapped PGs in state backfilling, but it
> looks like no more than 8
>
>
> Sorry I got confused! Do you mean that both recovery_op_priority and
> recovery_priority should be 63 to have a slow recovery?
recovery_priority is set per-pool to rank recovery relative to other pools.
This is not related to your questions.
I have same issue. My cluster version is 14.2.1, i never meet it before. I
see some information from this tracker :
https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/48033
___
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to
25 matches
Mail list logo
