Hi, after one week with only one a MDS all the errors have vanished and
the cluster it's running smoothly!
Thank you very much for the help!!
El 27/5/21 a las 9:50, Andres Rojas Guerrero escribió:
Thank you very much, very good explanation!!
El 27/5/21 a las 9:42, Dan van der Ster escribió:
Thank you very much, very good explanation!!
El 27/5/21 a las 9:42, Dan van der Ster escribió:
etween 100-200
--
***
Andrés Rojas Guerrero
Unidad Sistemas Linux
Area Arquitectura Tecnológica
Secretaría General Adjunta de Informática
Consejo
I don't think # clients alone is a good measure by which to decide to
deploy multiple MDSs -- idle clients create very little load, but just
a few badly behaving clients can use all the MDS performance. (If you
must hear a number, I can share that we have single MDSs with 2-3000
clients
Oh, very interesting!! I have reduced the number of MDS to one. Only one
question more, out of curiosity, from what number can we consider that
there are many clients?
El 27/5/21 a las 9:24, Dan van der Ster escribió:
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 9:21 AM Andres Rojas Guerrero wrote:
El
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 9:21 AM Andres Rojas Guerrero wrote:
>
>
>
> El 26/5/21 a las 16:51, Dan van der Ster escribió:
> > I see you have two active MDSs. Is your cluster more stable if you use
> > only one single active MDS?
>
> Good question!! I read form Ceph Doc:
>
> "You should configure
El 26/5/21 a las 16:51, Dan van der Ster escribió:
I see you have two active MDSs. Is your cluster more stable if you use
only one single active MDS?
Good question!! I read form Ceph Doc:
"You should configure multiple active MDS daemons when your metadata
performance is bottlenecked on
FS_DEGRADED indicates that your MDS restarted or stopped responding to
health beacons.
Are your MDSs going OOM?
I see you have two active MDSs. Is your cluster more stable if you use
only one single active MDS?
-- Dan
On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 2:44 PM Andres Rojas Guerrero wrote:
>
> Ok
Ok thank's, I will try to update Nautilus. But really I don't
understand the problem, apparently randomly Warnings appear:
[WRN] Health check failed: 1 MDSs report slow requests (MDS_SLOW_REQUEST)
cluster [INF] Health check cleared: FS_DEGRADED (was: 1 filesystem is
degraded)
: cluster
I've seen your other thread. Using 78GB of RAM when the memory limit
is set to 64GB is not highly unusual, and doesn't necessarily indicate
any problem.
It *would* be a problem if the MDS memory grows uncontrollably, however.
Otherwise, check those new defaults for caps recall -- they were
Thanks for the answer. Yes, during these last weeks I have had memory
consumption problems in the MDS nodes that led, at least it seemed to
me, to performance problems in CephFS. I have been varying, for example:
mds_cache_memory_limit
mds_min_caps_per_client
mds_health_cache_threshold
Hi,
The mds_cache_memory_limit should be set to something relative to the
RAM size of the MDS -- maybe 50% is a good rule of thumb, because
there are a few cases where the RSS can exceed this limit. Your
experience will help guide what size you need (metadata pool IO
activity will be really high
11 matches
Mail list logo
