What's the output of ceph osd dump | grep ^pool ? On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Mallikarjun Biradar < [email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Craig, > > > but, my concern is why ceph status is not reporting for pool 2 (testPool2 > in this case). Whether its not performing scrub or its ceph status report > issue? > > Though I have enough of objects in testPool2, scrub is not reporting > "active+clean+scrubbing" in "ceph -s". > > ems@rack6-ramp-4:~$ sudo ceph osd lspools > 0 rbd,1 testPool,2 testPool2, > ems@rack6-ramp-4:~$ > > ems@rack6-ramp-4:~$ sudo rados df > pool name category KB objects clones > degraded unfound rd rd KB wr wr KB > rbd - 0 0 0 > 0 0 0 0 0 0 > testPool - 5948025217 1452174 0 > 0 0 141056332 22948324301 141070117 22950524809 > testPool2 - 45039617 10999 0 > 0 0 11238999 44955958 11259655 45038593 > total used 18004641796 1463173 > total avail 32330689516 > total space 50335331312 > ems@rack6-ramp-4:~$ > > -Thanks & regards, > Mallikarjun Biradar > > On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 1:20 AM, Craig Lewis <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> ceph osd dump | grep ^pool will map pool names to numbers. PGs are >> named after the pool; PG 2.xx belongs to pool 2. >> >> rados df will tell you have many items and data are in a pool. >> >> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Mallikarjun Biradar < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Craig, >>> >>> ceph -s is not showing any PG's in pool2. >>> I have 3 pools. rbd and two pools that i created testPool and testPool2. >>> >>> I have more than 10TB of data in testPool1 and good amount of data in >>> testPool2 as well. >>> Iam not using rbd pool. >>> >>> -Thanks & regards, >>> Mallikarjun Biradar >>> On 3 Dec 2014 00:15, "Craig Lewis" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> You mean `ceph -w` and `ceph -s` didn't show any PGs in >>>> the active+clean+scrubbing state while pool 2's PGs were being scrubbed? >>>> >>>> I see that happen with my really small pools. I have a bunch of >>>> RadosGW pools that contain <5 objects, and ~1kB of data. When I scrub the >>>> PGs in those pools, they complete so fast that they never show up in `ceph >>>> -w`. >>>> >>>> >>>> Since you have pools 0, 1, and 2, I assume those are the default >>>> 'data', 'metadata', and 'rdb'. If you're not using RDB, then the rdb pool >>>> will be very small. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 5:32 AM, Mallikarjun Biradar < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> I was running scrub while cluster is in re-balancing state. >>>>> >>>>> From the osd logs.. >>>>> >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:50:26.934802 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 0.3 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:50:27.890785 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 0.24 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:50:31.902978 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 0.25 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:50:33.088060 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 0.33 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:50:50.828893 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 1.61 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:51:06.774648 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 1.68 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:51:20.463283 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 1.80 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:51:39.883295 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 1.89 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:52:00.568808 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 1.9f scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:52:15.897191 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 1.a3 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:52:34.681874 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 1.aa scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:52:47.833630 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 1.b1 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:53:09.312792 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 1.b3 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:53:25.324635 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 1.bd scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:53:48.638475 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 1.c3 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:54:02.996972 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 1.d7 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:54:19.660038 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 1.d8 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:54:32.780646 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 1.fa scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:54:36.772931 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 2.4 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:54:41.758487 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 2.9 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:54:46.910043 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 2.a scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:54:51.908335 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 2.16 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:54:54.940807 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 2.19 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:55:00.956170 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 2.44 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:55:01.948455 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 2.4f scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:55:07.273587 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 2.76 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:55:10.641274 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 2.9e scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:55:11.621669 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 2.ab scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:55:18.261900 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 2.b0 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:55:19.560766 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 2.b1 scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:55:20.501591 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 2.bb scrub ok >>>>> 2014-12-02 18:55:21.523936 7fcc6b614700 0 log_channel(default) log >>>>> [INF] : 2.cd scrub ok >>>>> >>>>> Interestingly, for pg's 2.x (2.4, 2.9 etc)in logs here, cluster status >>>>> was not reporting scrubbing, whereas for 0.x & 1.x it was reporting as >>>>> scrubbing in cluster status. >>>>> >>>>> In case of scrub operation on PG's (2.x) is really scrubbing performed >>>>> OR cluster status is missing to report them? >>>>> >>>>> -Thanks & Regards, >>>>> Mallikarjun Biradar >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> ceph-users mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> >
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
