Hi,

Just a curiosity... It looks like you're comparing an EC pool in octopus to
a replicated pool in nautilus. Does primary affinity work for you in
octopus on a replicated pool? And does a nautilus EC pool work?

.. Dan



On Fri., May 20, 2022, 13:53 Denis Polom, <denispo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi
>
> I observed high latencies and mount points hanging since Octopus release
> and it's still observed on Pacific latest while draining OSD.
>
> Cluster setup:
>
> Ceph Pacific 16.2.7
>
> Cephfs with EC data pool
>
> EC profile setup:
>
> crush-device-class=
> crush-failure-domain=host
> crush-root=default
> jerasure-per-chunk-alignment=false
> k=10
> m=2
> plugin=jerasure
> technique=reed_sol_van
> w=8
>
> Description:
>
> If we have broken drive, we are removing it from Ceph cluster by
> draining it first. That means changing its crush weight to 0
>
> ceph osd crush reweight osd.1 0
>
> Normally on Nautilus it didn't affected clients. But after upgrade to
> Octopus (and since Octopus till current Pacific release) I can observe
> very high IO latencies on clients while OSD being drained (10sec and
> higher).
>
> By debugging I found out that drained OSD is still listed as
> ACTIVE_PRIMARY and that happens only on EC pools and only since Octopus.
> I tested it back on Nautilus, to be sure, where behavior is correct and
> drained OSD is not listed under UP and ACTIVE OSDs for PGs.
>
> Even if setting up primary-affinity for given OSD to 0 this doesn't have
> any effect on EC pool.
>
> Bellow are my debugs:
>
> Buggy behavior on Octopus and Pacific:
>
> Before draining osd.70:
>
> PG_STAT  OBJECTS  MISSING_ON_PRIMARY  DEGRADED  MISPLACED UNFOUND
> BYTES       OMAP_BYTES*  OMAP_KEYS*  LOG   DISK_LOG
> STATE                          STATE_STAMP VERSION
> REPORTED           UP UP_PRIMARY  ACTING
> ACTING_PRIMARY LAST_SCRUB         SCRUB_STAMP LAST_DEEP_SCRUB
> DEEP_SCRUB_STAMP                 SNAPTRIMQ_LEN
> 16.1fff     2269                   0         0          0 0
> 8955297727            0           0  2449 2449
> active+clean 2022-05-19T08:41:55.241734+0200    19403690'275685
> 19407588:19607199    [70,206,216,375,307,57]          70
> [70,206,216,375,307,57]              70    19384365'275621
> 2022-05-19T08:41:55.241493+0200    19384365'275621
> 2022-05-19T08:41:55.241493+0200              0
> dumped pgs
>
>
> after setting osd.70 crush weight to 0 (osd.70 is still acting primary):
>
>   UP                         UP_PRIMARY ACTING
> ACTING_PRIMARY  LAST_SCRUB SCRUB_STAMP
> LAST_DEEP_SCRUB DEEP_SCRUB_STAMP                 SNAPTRIMQ_LEN
> 16.1fff     2269                   0         0       2269 0
> 8955297727            0           0  2449      2449
> active+remapped+backfill_wait  2022-05-20T08:51:54.249071+0200
> 19403690'275685  19407668:19607289 [71,206,216,375,307,57]          71
> [70,206,216,375,307,57]              70    19384365'275621
> 2022-05-19T08:41:55.241493+0200    19384365'275621
> 2022-05-19T08:41:55.241493+0200              0
> dumped pgs
>
>
> Correct behavior on Nautilus:
>
> Before draining osd.10:
>
> PG_STAT OBJECTS MISSING_ON_PRIMARY DEGRADED MISPLACED UNFOUND BYTES
> OMAP_BYTES* OMAP_KEYS* LOG DISK_LOG STATE STATE_STAMP
> VERSION REPORTED UP         UP_PRIMARY ACTING     ACTING_PRIMARY
> LAST_SCRUB SCRUB_STAMP LAST_DEEP_SCRUB DEEP_SCRUB_STAMP
> SNAPTRIMQ_LEN
> 2.4e          2                  0        0         0       0
> 8388608           0          0   2        2 active+clean 2022-05-20
> 02:13:47.432104    61'2    75:40   [10,0,7] 10   [10,0,7]
> 10        0'0 2022-05-20 01:44:36.217286             0'0 2022-05-20
> 01:44:36.217286             0
>
> after setting osd.10 crush weight to 0 (behavior is correct, osd.10 is
> not listed, not used):
>
>
> root@nautilus1:~# ceph pg dump pgs | head -2
> PG_STAT OBJECTS MISSING_ON_PRIMARY DEGRADED MISPLACED UNFOUND BYTES
> OMAP_BYTES* OMAP_KEYS* LOG DISK_LOG STATE
> STATE_STAMP                VERSION REPORTED UP         UP_PRIMARY
> ACTING     ACTING_PRIMARY LAST_SCRUB SCRUB_STAMP
> LAST_DEEP_SCRUB DEEP_SCRUB_STAMP           SNAPTRIMQ_LEN
> 2.4e         14                  0        0         0       0
> 58720256           0          0  18       18 active+clean 2022-05-20
> 02:18:59.414812   75'18    80:43 [22,0,7]         22
> [22,0,7]             22        0'0 2022-05-20
> 01:44:36.217286             0'0 2022-05-20 01:44:36.217286             0
>
>
> Now question is if is it some implemented feature?
>
> Or is it a bug?
>
> Thank you!
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to