[Including ceph-users alias]

2015-08-03 16:01 GMT+08:00 乔建峰 <[email protected]>:

> Hi Cephers,
>
> Currently, I'm experiencing an issue which suffers me a lot, so I'm
> writing to ask for your comments/help/suggestions. More details are
> provided bellow.
>
> Issue:
> I set up a cluster having 24 OSDs and created one pool with 1024 placement
> groups on it for a small startup company. The number 1024 was calculated
> per the equation (OSDs * 100)/pool size. The cluster have been running
> quite well for a long time. But recently, our monitoring system always
> complains that some disks' usage exceed 85%. I log into the system and find
> out that some disks' usage are really very high, but some are not(less than
> 60%). Each time when the issue happens, I have to manually re-balance the
> distribution. This is a short-term solution, I'm not willing to do it all
> the time.
>
> Two long-term solutions come in my mind,
> 1) Ask the customers to expand their clusters by adding more OSDs. But I
> think they will ask me to explain the reason of the imbalance data
> distribution. We've already done some analysis on the environment, we
> learned that the most imbalance part in the CRUSH is the mapping between
> object and pg. The biggest pg has 613 objects, while the smallest pg only
> has 226 objects.
>
> 2) Increase the number of placement groups. It can be of great help for
> statistically uniform data distribution, but it can also incur significant
> data movement as PGs are effective being split. I just cannot do it in our
> customers' environment before we 100% understand the consequence. So anyone
> did this under a production environment? How much does this operation
> affect the performance of Clients?
>
> Any comments/help/suggestions will be highly appreciated.
>
> --
> Best Regards
> Jevon
>



-- 
Best Regards
Jevon
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to