Hi Matthew,
To make a simplistic comparison, it is generally not recommended to raid 5
with large disks (>1 TB) due to the probability (low but not zero) of
losing another disk during the rebuild.
So imagine losing a host full of disks.
Additionally, min_size=1 means you can no longer maintain your cluster
(update, etc.), it's dangerous.
Unless you can afford to lose/rebuild your cluster, you should never have a
min_size <2
________________________________________________________
Cordialement,
*David CASIER*
________________________________________________________
Le mar. 5 déc. 2023 à 10:03, duluxoz <dulu...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> Thanks David, I knew I had something wrong :-)
>
> Just for my own edification: Why is k=2, m=1 not recommended for
> production? Considered to "fragile", or something else?
>
> Cheers
>
> Dulux-Oz
>
> On 05/12/2023 19:53, David Rivera wrote:
> > First problem here is you are using crush-failure-domain=osd when you
> > should use crush-failure-domain=host. With three hosts, you should use
> > k=2, m=1; this is not recommended in production environment.
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 4, 2023, 23:26 duluxoz <dulu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Looking for some help/explanation around erasure code pools, etc.
> >
> > I set up a 3-node Ceph (Quincy) cluster with each box holding 7 OSDs
> > (HDDs) and each box running Monitor, Manager, and iSCSI Gateway.
> > For the
> > record the cluster runs beautifully, without resource issues, etc.
> >
> > I created an Erasure Code Profile, etc:
> >
> > ~~~
> > ceph osd erasure-code-profile set my_ec_profile plugin=jerasure
> > k=4 m=2
> > crush-failure-domain=osd
> > ceph osd crush rule create-erasure my_ec_rule my_ec_profile
> > ceph osd crush rule create-replicated my_replicated_rule default host
> > ~~~
> >
> > My Crush Map is:
> >
> > ~~~
> > # begin crush map
> > tunable choose_local_tries 0
> > tunable choose_local_fallback_tries 0
> > tunable choose_total_tries 50
> > tunable chooseleaf_descend_once 1
> > tunable chooseleaf_vary_r 1
> > tunable chooseleaf_stable 1
> > tunable straw_calc_version 1
> > tunable allowed_bucket_algs 54
> >
> > # devices
> > device 0 osd.0 class hdd
> > device 1 osd.1 class hdd
> > device 2 osd.2 class hdd
> > device 3 osd.3 class hdd
> > device 4 osd.4 class hdd
> > device 5 osd.5 class hdd
> > device 6 osd.6 class hdd
> > device 7 osd.7 class hdd
> > device 8 osd.8 class hdd
> > device 9 osd.9 class hdd
> > device 10 osd.10 class hdd
> > device 11 osd.11 class hdd
> > device 12 osd.12 class hdd
> > device 13 osd.13 class hdd
> > device 14 osd.14 class hdd
> > device 15 osd.15 class hdd
> > device 16 osd.16 class hdd
> > device 17 osd.17 class hdd
> > device 18 osd.18 class hdd
> > device 19 osd.19 class hdd
> > device 20 osd.20 class hdd
> >
> > # types
> > type 0 osd
> > type 1 host
> > type 2 chassis
> > type 3 rack
> > type 4 row
> > type 5 pdu
> > type 6 pod
> > type 7 room
> > type 8 datacenter
> > type 9 zone
> > type 10 region
> > type 11 root
> >
> > # buckets
> > host ceph_1 {
> > id -3 # do not change unnecessarily
> > id -4 class hdd # do not change unnecessarily
> > # weight 38.09564
> > alg straw2
> > hash 0 # rjenkins1
> > item osd.0 weight 5.34769
> > item osd.1 weight 5.45799
> > item osd.2 weight 5.45799
> > item osd.3 weight 5.45799
> > item osd.4 weight 5.45799
> > item osd.5 weight 5.45799
> > item osd.6 weight 5.45799
> > }
> > host ceph_2 {
> > id -5 # do not change unnecessarily
> > id -6 class hdd # do not change unnecessarily
> > # weight 38.09564
> > alg straw2
> > hash 0 # rjenkins1
> > item osd.7 weight 5.34769
> > item osd.8 weight 5.45799
> > item osd.9 weight 5.45799
> > item osd.10 weight 5.45799
> > item osd.11 weight 5.45799
> > item osd.12 weight 5.45799
> > item osd.13 weight 5.45799
> > }
> > host ceph_3 {
> > id -7 # do not change unnecessarily
> > id -8 class hdd # do not change unnecessarily
> > # weight 38.09564
> > alg straw2
> > hash 0 # rjenkins1
> > item osd.14 weight 5.34769
> > item osd.15 weight 5.45799
> > item osd.16 weight 5.45799
> > item osd.17 weight 5.45799
> > item osd.18 weight 5.45799
> > item osd.19 weight 5.45799
> > item osd.20 weight 5.45799
> > }
> > root default {
> > id -1 # do not change unnecessarily
> > id -2 class hdd # do not change unnecessarily
> > # weight 114.28693
> > alg straw2
> > hash 0 # rjenkins1
> > item ceph_1 weight 38.09564
> > item ceph_2 weight 38.09564
> > item ceph_3 weight 38.09564
> > }
> >
> > # rules
> > rule replicated_rule {
> > id 0
> > type replicated
> > step take default
> > step chooseleaf firstn 0 type host
> > step emit
> > }
> > rule my_replicated_rule {
> > id 1
> > type replicated
> > step take default
> > step chooseleaf firstn 0 type host
> > step emit
> > }
> > rule my_ec_rule {
> > id 2
> > type erasure
> > step set_chooseleaf_tries 5
> > step set_choose_tries 100
> > step take default
> > step choose indep 3 type host
> > step chooseleaf indep 2 type osd
> > step emit
> > }
> >
> > # end crush map
> > ~~~
> >
> > Finally I create a pool:
> >
> > ~~~
> > ceph osd pool create my_pool 32 32 erasure my_ec_profile my_ec_rule
> > ceph osd pool application enable my_meta_pool rbd
> > rbd pool init my_meta_pool
> > rbd pool init my_pool
> > rbd create --size 16T my_pool/my_disk_1 --data-pool my_pool
> > --image-feature journaling
> > ~~~
> >
> > So all this is to have some VMs (oVirt VMs, for the record) with
> > automatic fall-over in the case of a Ceph Node loss - ie I was
> > trying to
> > "replicate" a 3-Disk RAID 5 array across the Ceph Nodes, so that I
> > could
> > loose a Node and still have a working set of VMs.
> >
> > However, I took one of the Ceph Nodes down (gracefully) for some
> > maintenance the other day and I lost *all* the VMs (ie oVirt
> > complained
> > that there was no active pool). As soon as I brought the down node
> > back
> > up everything was good again.
> >
> > So my question is: What did I do wrong with my config?
> >
> > Sound I, for example, change the EC Profile to `k=2, m=1`, but how is
> > that practically different from `k=4, m=2` - yes, the later
> > spreads the
> > pool over more disks, but it should still only put 2 disks on each
> > node,
> > shouldn't it?
> >
> > Thanks in advance
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Dulux-Oz
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
