Re: [ceph-users] I/O hangs with 2 node failure even if one node isn't involved in I/O

Hi, I should clarify. When you worry about concurrent osd failures, it's more likely that the source of that is from i.e. network/rack/power - you'd organize your osd's spread across those failure domains, and tell crush that you put each replica in separate failure domains. I.e. you have 3 or

Re: [ceph-users] I/O hangs with 2 node failure even if one node isn't involved in I/O

For the most part - I'm assuming min_size=2, size=3. In the min_size=3 and size=3 this changes. size is how many replicas of an object to maintain, min_size is how many writes need to succeed before the primary can ack the operation to the client. larger min_size most likely higher latency for

Re: [ceph-users] Do we know which version of ceph-client has this fix ? http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/17191

2017-03-22 5:30 GMT+01:00 Brad Hubbard : > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Deepak Naidu wrote: > > Do we know which version of ceph client does this bug has a fix. Bug: > > http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/17191 > > > > > > > > I have ceph-common-10.2.6-0

Re: [ceph-users] How to mount different ceph FS using ceph-fuse or kernel cephfs mount

Hi John, I tried the below option for ceph-fuse & kernel mount. Below is what I see/error. 1) When trying using ceph-fuse, the mount command succeeds but I see parse error setting 'client_mds_namespace' to 'dataX' . Not sure if this is normal message or some error 2) When

[ceph-users] Setting a different number of minimum replicas for reading and writing operations

Hi all, Is it possible to create a pool where the minimum number of replicas for the write operation to be confirmed is 2 but the minimum number of replicas to allow the object to be read is 1? This would be useful when a pool consists of immutable objects, so we'd have: * size 3 (we always keep

[ceph-users] New metrics.ceph.com!

Hey cephers, Just wanted to share that the new interactive metrics dashboard is now available for tire-kicking. https://metrics.ceph.com There are still a few data pipeline issues and other misc cleanup that probably needs to happen. We have removed some of the repo tracking to be more

Re: [ceph-users] can a OSD affect performance from pool X when blocking/slow requests PGs from pool Y ?

any thoughts ? On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:22 PM, Alejandro Comisario wrote: > Greg, thanks for the reply. > True that i cant provide enough information to know what happened since > the pool is gone. > > But based on your experience, can i please take some of your time,

Re: [ceph-users] I/O hangs with 2 node failure even if one node isn't involved in I/O

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Kjetil Jørgensen wrote: >> c. Reads can continue from the single online OSD even in pgs that >> happened to have two of 3 osds offline. >> > > Hypothetically (This is partially informed guessing on my part): > If the survivor happens to be

[ceph-users] strange radosgw-admin create user behaviour (bug?)

Hi, radosgw-admin create user sometimes seem to misbehave when trying to create similarly-named accounts with the same email address: radosgw-admin -n client.rgw.sto-1-2 user create --uid=XXXDELETEME --display-name=carthago --email=h...@sanger.ac.uk { "user_id": "XXXDELETEME", [...]

Re: [ceph-users] How to mount different ceph FS using ceph-fuse or kernel cephfs mount

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 5:31 PM, Deepak Naidu wrote: > Greetings, > > > > I have below two cephFS “volumes/filesystem” created on my ceph cluster. Yes > I used the “enable_multiple” flag to enable the multiple cephFS feature. My > question > > > > 1) How do I mention the

[ceph-users] client network zero transfer during rebalance

Hello, I have a small cluster of Ceph installed and I have followed the manual installation instructions since I do not have internet. I have configured the system with two network interfaces, one for the client network and one for the cluster network. The problem is that the system when it begins

Re: [ceph-users] What's the actual justification for min_size?

I definitely saw it on a Hammer cluster, though I decided to check my IRC logs for more context and found that in my specific cases it was due to PGs going incomplete. `ceph health detail` offered the following, for instance: pg 8.31f is remapped+incomplete, acting [39] (reducing pool one

Re: [ceph-users] add multiple OSDs to cluster

Hi Jonathan, Anthony and Steve, Thanks very much for your valuable advise and suggestions! MJ On 03/21/2017 08:53 PM, Jonathan Proulx wrote: If it took 7hr for one drive you probably already done this (or defaults are for low impact recovery) but before doing anything you want to besure

Re: [ceph-users] XFS attempt to access beyond end of device

On 22 March 2017 at 21:23, Martin Palma wrote: >> [429280.254400] attempt to access beyond end of device >> [429280.254412] sdi1: rw=0, want=19134412768, limit=19134412767 > > We are seeing the same for our OSDs which have the journal as a > separate partition always on the same

Re: [ceph-users] XFS attempt to access beyond end of device

> [429280.254400] attempt to access beyond end of device > [429280.254412] sdi1: rw=0, want=19134412768, limit=19134412767 We are seeing the same for our OSDs which have the journal as a separate partition always on the same disk and only for OSDs which we added after our cluster was upgraded to

Re: [ceph-users] Preconditioning an RBD image

Does iostat (eg. iostat -xmy 1 /dev/sd[a-z]) show high util% or await during these problems? Ceph filestore requires lots of metadata writing (directory splitting for example), xattrs, leveldb, etc. which are small sync writes that HDDs are bad at (100-300 iops), and SSDs are good at (cheapo

Re: [ceph-users] XFS attempt to access beyond end of device

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Marcus Furlong wrote: > Hi, > > I'm experiencing the same issue as outlined in this post: > > http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/2016-September/013330.html > > I have also deployed this jewel cluster using ceph-deploy. > > This

Re: [ceph-users] rados gateway

Hello Pankaj - Do you use the default port ( 7480 ) ? - Do you use cephx ? - i assume you use the default Citeweb ( embedded already ) . if you wish to use another port , you should modify your conf file and add the below rgw_frontends = "civetweb port=80"( this is for port 80 ) -

Re: [ceph-users] XFS attempt to access beyond end of device

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Marcus Furlong wrote: > Hi, > > I'm experiencing the same issue as outlined in this post: > > http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/2016-September/013330.html > > I have also deployed this jewel cluster using ceph-deploy. > > This

[ceph-users] XFS attempt to access beyond end of device

Hi, I'm experiencing the same issue as outlined in this post: http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/2016-September/013330.html I have also deployed this jewel cluster using ceph-deploy. This is the message I see at boot (happens for all drives, on all OSD nodes): [ 92.938882]