try from admin node ceph osd df ceph osd status thanks Joe >>> <c...@elchaka.de> 2/10/2020 10:44 AM >>> Hello MJ,
Perhaps your PGs are a unbalanced? Ceph osd df tree Greetz Mehmet Am 10. Februar 2020 14:58:25 MEZ schrieb lists <li...@merit.unu.edu>: >Hi, > >We would like to replace the current seagate ST4000NM0034 HDDs in our >ceph cluster with SSDs, and before doing that, we would like to >checkout >the typical usage of our current drives, over the last years, so we can > >select the best (price/performance/endurance) SSD to replace them with. > >I am trying to extract this info from the fields "Blocks received from >initiator" / "blocks sent to initiator", as these are the fields >smartctl gets from the seagate disks. But the numbers seem strange, and > >I would like to request feedback here. > >Three nodes, all equal, 8 OSDs per node, all 4TB ST4000NM0034 >(filestore) HDDs with SSD-based journals: > >> root@node1:~# ceph osd crush tree >> ID CLASS WEIGHT TYPE NAME >> -1 87.35376 root default >> -2 29.11688 host node1 >> 0 hdd 3.64000 osd.0 >> 1 hdd 3.64000 osd.1 >> 2 hdd 3.63689 osd.2 >> 3 hdd 3.64000 osd.3 >> 12 hdd 3.64000 osd.12 >> 13 hdd 3.64000 osd.13 >> 14 hdd 3.64000 osd.14 >> 15 hdd 3.64000 osd.15 >> -3 29.12000 host node2 >> 4 hdd 3.64000 osd.4 >> 5 hdd 3.64000 osd.5 >> 6 hdd 3.64000 osd.6 >> 7 hdd 3.64000 osd.7 >> 16 hdd 3.64000 osd.16 >> 17 hdd 3.64000 osd.17 >> 18 hdd 3.64000 osd.18 >> 19 hdd 3.64000 osd.19 >> -4 29.11688 host node3 >> 8 hdd 3.64000 osd.8 >> 9 hdd 3.64000 osd.9 >> 10 hdd 3.64000 osd.10 >> 11 hdd 3.64000 osd.11 >> 20 hdd 3.64000 osd.20 >> 21 hdd 3.64000 osd.21 >> 22 hdd 3.64000 osd.22 >> 23 hdd 3.63689 osd.23 > >We are looking at the numbers from smartctl, and basing our >calculations >on this output for each individual various OSD: >> Vendor (Seagate) cache information >> Blocks sent to initiator = 3783529066 >> Blocks received from initiator = 3121186120 >> Blocks read from cache and sent to initiator = 545427169 >> Number of read and write commands whose size <= segment size = >93877358 >> Number of read and write commands whose size > segment size = >2290879 > >I created the following spreadsheet: > >> blocks sent blocks received total blocks >> to initiator from initiator calculated read% write% >> aka >> node1 >> osd0 905060564 1900663448 2805724012 32,26% 67,74% >> sda >> osd1 2270442418 3756215880 6026658298 37,67% 62,33% >> sdb >> osd2 3531938448 3940249192 7472187640 47,27% 52,73% >> sdc >> osd3 2824808123 3130655416 5955463539 47,43% 52,57% >> sdd >> osd12 1956722491 1294854032 3251576523 60,18% 39,82% >> sdg >> osd13 3410188306 1265443936 4675632242 72,94% 27,06% >> sdh >> osd14 3765454090 3115079112 6880533202 54,73% 45,27% >> sdi >> osd15 2272246730 2218847264 4491093994 50,59% 49,41% >> sdj >> >> node2 >> osd4 3974937107 740853712 4715790819 84,29% 15,71% >> sda >> osd5 1181377668 2109150744 3290528412 35,90% 64,10% >> sdb >> osd5 1903438106 608869008 2512307114 75,76% 24,24% >> sdc >> osd7 3511170043 724345936 4235515979 82,90% 17,10% >> sdd >> osd16 2642731906 3981984640 6624716546 39,89% 60,11% >> sdg >> osd17 3994977805 3703856288 7698834093 51,89% 48,11% >> sdh >> osd18 3992157229 2096991672 6089148901 65,56% 34,44% >> sdi >> osd19 279766405 1053039640 1332806045 20,99% 79,01% >> sdj >> >> node3 >> osd8 3711322586 234696960 3946019546 94,05% 5,95% >> sda >> osd9 1203912715 3132990000 4336902715 27,76% 72,24% >> sdb >> osd10 912356010 1681434416 2593790426 35,17% 64,83% >> sdc >> osd11 810488345 2626589896 3437078241 23,58% 76,42% >> sdd >> osd20 1506879946 2421596680 3928476626 38,36% 61,64% >> sdg >> osd21 2991526593 7525120 2999051713 99,75% 0,25% >> sdh >> osd22 29560337 3226114552 3255674889 0,91% 99,09% >> sdi >> osd23 2019195656 2563506320 4582701976 44,06% 55,94% >> sdj > >But as can be seen above, this results in some very strange numbers, >for >example node3/osd21 and node2/osd19, node3/osd8, the numbers are >unlikely. > >So, probably we're doing something wrong in our logic here. > >Can someone explain what we're doing wrong, and is it possible to >obtain >stats like these also from ceph directly? Does ceph keep historical >stats like above..? > >MJ >_______________________________________________ >ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io >To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io
