Hi Greg,
This tracker issue is relevant: http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/7288
Cheers, Dan

On 11 Jun 2014, at 00:30, Gregory Farnum <g...@inktank.com> wrote:

> Hey Mike, has your manual scheduling resolved this? I think I saw
> another similar-sounding report, so a feature request to improve scrub
> scheduling would be welcome. :)
> -Greg
> Software Engineer #42 @ http://inktank.com | http://ceph.com
> 
> 
> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Mike Dawson <mike.daw...@cloudapt.com> wrote:
>> I tend to set it whenever I don't want to be bothered by storage performance
>> woes (nights I value sleep, etc).
>> 
>> This cluster is bounded by relentless small writes (it has a couple dozen
>> rbd volumes backing video surveillance DVRs). Some of the software we run is
>> completely unaffected whereas other software falls apart during periods of
>> deep-scrubs. I theorize it has to do with the individual software's attitude
>> about flushing to disk / buffering.
>> 
>> - Mike
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 5/20/2014 8:31 PM, Aaron Ten Clay wrote:
>>> 
>>> For what it's worth, version 0.79 has different headers, and the awk
>>> command needs $19 instead of $20. But here is the output I have on a
>>> small cluster that I recently rebuilt:
>>> 
>>> $ ceph pg dump all | grep active | awk '{ print $19}' | sort -k1 | uniq -c
>>> dumped all in format plain
>>>       1 2014-05-15
>>>       2 2014-05-17
>>>      19 2014-05-18
>>>     193 2014-05-19
>>>     105 2014-05-20
>>> 
>>> I have set noscrub and nodeep-scrub, as well as noout and nodown off and
>>> on while I performed various maintenance, but that hasn't (apparently)
>>> impeded the regular schedule.
>>> 
>>> With what frequency are you setting the nodeep-scrub flag?
>>> 
>>> -Aaron
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Mike Dawson <mike.daw...@cloudapt.com
>>> <mailto:mike.daw...@cloudapt.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>    Today I noticed that deep-scrub is consistently missing some of my
>>>    Placement Groups, leaving me with the following distribution of PGs
>>>    and the last day they were successfully deep-scrubbed.
>>> 
>>>    # ceph pg dump all | grep active | awk '{ print $20}' | sort -k1 |
>>>    uniq -c
>>>           5 2013-11-06
>>>         221 2013-11-20
>>>           1 2014-02-17
>>>          25 2014-02-19
>>>          60 2014-02-20
>>>           4 2014-03-06
>>>           3 2014-04-03
>>>           6 2014-04-04
>>>           6 2014-04-05
>>>          13 2014-04-06
>>>           4 2014-04-08
>>>           3 2014-04-10
>>>           2 2014-04-11
>>>          50 2014-04-12
>>>          28 2014-04-13
>>>          14 2014-04-14
>>>           3 2014-04-15
>>>          78 2014-04-16
>>>          44 2014-04-17
>>>           8 2014-04-18
>>>           1 2014-04-20
>>>          16 2014-05-02
>>>          69 2014-05-04
>>>         140 2014-05-05
>>>         569 2014-05-06
>>>        9231 2014-05-07
>>>         103 2014-05-08
>>>         514 2014-05-09
>>>        1593 2014-05-10
>>>         393 2014-05-16
>>>        2563 2014-05-17
>>>        1283 2014-05-18
>>>        1640 2014-05-19
>>>        1979 2014-05-20
>>> 
>>>    I have been running the default "osd deep scrub interval" of once
>>>    per week, but have disabled deep-scrub on several occasions in an
>>>    attempt to avoid the associated degraded cluster performance I have
>>>    written about before.
>>> 
>>>    To get the PGs longest in need of a deep-scrub started, I set the
>>>    nodeep-scrub flag, and wrote a script to manually kick off
>>>    deep-scrub according to age. It is processing as expected.
>>> 
>>>    Do you consider this a feature request or a bug? Perhaps the code
>>>    that schedules PGs to deep-scrub could be improved to prioritize PGs
>>>    that have needed a deep-scrub the longest.
>>> 
>>>    Thanks,
>>>    Mike Dawson
>>>    _________________________________________________
>>>    ceph-users mailing list
>>>    ceph-users@lists.ceph.com <mailto:ceph-users@lists.ceph.com>
>>>    http://lists.ceph.com/__listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.__com
>>>    <http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com>
>>> 
>>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> ceph-users mailing list
>> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to