Re: [ceph-users] Num of PGs

2013-07-15 Thread Gregory Farnum
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: > Am 15.07.2013 10:19, schrieb Sylvain Munaut: >> Hi, >> >> I'm curious what would be the official recommendation for when you >> have multiple pools. >> In total we have 21 pools and that lead to around 12000 PGs for only 24 OSD

Re: [ceph-users] Num of PGs

2013-07-15 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Am 15.07.2013 10:19, schrieb Sylvain Munaut: > Hi, > > I'm curious what would be the official recommendation for when you > have multiple pools. > In total we have 21 pools and that lead to around 12000 PGs for only 24 OSDs. > > The 'data' and 'metadata' pools are actually unused, and then we hav

Re: [ceph-users] Num of PGs

2013-07-15 Thread Sylvain Munaut
Hi, I'm curious what would be the official recommendation for when you have multiple pools. In total we have 21 pools and that lead to around 12000 PGs for only 24 OSDs. The 'data' and 'metadata' pools are actually unused, and then we have 9 pools of 'rgw' meta data ( .rgw, .rgw.control, .users.u

Re: [ceph-users] Num of PGs

2013-07-12 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Am 12.07.2013 um 21:23 schrieb Mark Nelson : > On 07/12/2013 02:19 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: >> Right now I have 4096. 36*100/3 => 1200. As recovery take ages I thought >> this might be the reason. > > Are you seeing any craziness on the mons? What could this be? Nothing noticed

Re: [ceph-users] Num of PGs

2013-07-12 Thread Mark Nelson
On 07/12/2013 02:19 PM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: Right now I have 4096. 36*100/3 => 1200. As recovery take ages I thought this might be the reason. Are you seeing any craziness on the mons? Stefan This mail was sent with my iPhone. Am 12.07.2013 um 17:03 schrieb Mark Nelson :

Re: [ceph-users] Num of PGs

2013-07-12 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Right now I have 4096. 36*100/3 => 1200. As recovery take ages I thought this might be the reason. Stefan This mail was sent with my iPhone. Am 12.07.2013 um 17:03 schrieb Mark Nelson : > On 07/12/2013 09:53 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: >> 2013/7/12 Mark Nelson : >>> At large numbers of PG

Re: [ceph-users] Num of PGs

2013-07-12 Thread Mark Nelson
On 07/12/2013 09:53 AM, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: 2013/7/12 Mark Nelson : At large numbers of PGs it may not matter very much, but I don't think it would hurt either! Basically this has to do with how ceph_stable_mod works. At non-power-of-two values, the bucket counts aren't even, but that

Re: [ceph-users] Num of PGs

2013-07-12 Thread Gandalf Corvotempesta
2013/7/12 Mark Nelson : > At large numbers of PGs it may not matter very much, but I don't think it > would hurt either! > > Basically this has to do with how ceph_stable_mod works. At > non-power-of-two values, the bucket counts aren't even, but that's only a > small part of the story and may ult

Re: [ceph-users] Num of PGs

2013-07-12 Thread Mark Nelson
On 07/12/2013 01:45 AM, Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG wrote: Hello, is this calculation for the number of PGs correct? 36 OSDs, Replication Factor 3 36 * 100 / 3 => 1200 PGs But i then read that it should be an exponent of 2 so it should be 2048? At large numbers of PGs it may not matter ver

[ceph-users] Num of PGs

2013-07-11 Thread Stefan Priebe - Profihost AG
Hello, is this calculation for the number of PGs correct? 36 OSDs, Replication Factor 3 36 * 100 / 3 => 1200 PGs But i then read that it should be an exponent of 2 so it should be 2048? Stefan ___ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com htt