Here is the per pool pg_num info:
'data' pg_num 64
'metadata' pg_num 64
'rbd' pg_num 64
'npr_archive' pg_num 6775
'.rgw.root' pg_num 64
'.rgw.control' pg_num 64
'.rgw' pg_num 64
'.rgw.gc' pg_num 64
'.users.uid' pg_num 64
'.users.email' pg_num 64
'.users' pg_num 64
'.usage' pg_num 64
'.rgw.buckets.index' pg_num 128
'.intent-log' pg_num 8
'.rgw.buckets' pg_num 64
'kube' pg_num 512
'.log' pg_num 8
Here is the df output:
GLOBAL:
SIZE AVAIL RAW USED %RAW USED
1.06PiB 306TiB 778TiB 71.75
POOLS:
NAME ID USED %USED MAX AVAIL OBJECTS
data 0 11.7GiB 0.14 8.17TiB 3006
metadata 1 0B 0 8.17TiB 0
rbd 2 43.2GiB 0.51 8.17TiB 11147
npr_archive 3 258TiB 97.93 5.45TiB 82619649
.rgw.root 4 1001B 0 8.17TiB 5
.rgw.control 5 0B 0 8.17TiB 8
.rgw 6 6.16KiB 0 8.17TiB 35
.rgw.gc 7 0B 0 8.17TiB 32
.users.uid 8 0B 0 8.17TiB 0
.users.email 9 0B 0 8.17TiB 0
.users 10 0B 0 8.17TiB 0
.usage 11 0B 0 8.17TiB 1
.rgw.buckets.index 12 0B 0 8.17TiB 26
.intent-log 17 0B 0 5.45TiB 0
.rgw.buckets 18 24.2GiB 0.29 8.17TiB 6622
kube 21 1.82GiB 0.03 5.45TiB 550
.log 22 0B 0 5.45TiB 176
The stuff in the data pool and the rwg pools is old data that we used
for testing...if you guys think that removing everything outside of rbd
and npr_archive would make a significant impact I will give it a try.
Thanks,
Shain
On 4/30/19 1:15 PM, Jack wrote:
Hi,
I see that you are using rgw
RGW comes with many pools, yet most of them are used for metadata and
configuration, those do not store many data
Such pools do not need more than a couple PG, each (I use pg_num = 8)
You need to allocate your pg on pool that actually stores the data
Please do the following, to let us know more:
Print the pg_num per pool:
for i in $(rados lspools); do echo -n "$i: "; ceph osd pool get $i
pg_num; done
Print the usage per pool:
ceph df
Also, instead of doing a "ceph osd reweight-by-utilization", check out
the balancer plugin :
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__docs.ceph.com_docs_mimic_mgr_balancer_&d=DwICAg&c=E2nBno7hEddFhl23N5nD1Q&r=cqFccwnwHGRorPuRWs36Dw&m=1BfaF7xeFT_o8pdT9mrRmWm0gCn4wgalDi3UviTy24M&s=YoiU-wa-ZXHUEj8xYmiSVRVnXnDenoUaRZMa-bfRFvo&e=
Finally, in nautilus, the pg can now upscale and downscale automaticaly
See
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__ceph.com_rados_new-2Din-2Dnautilus-2Dpg-2Dmerging-2Dand-2Dautotuning_&d=DwICAg&c=E2nBno7hEddFhl23N5nD1Q&r=cqFccwnwHGRorPuRWs36Dw&m=1BfaF7xeFT_o8pdT9mrRmWm0gCn4wgalDi3UviTy24M&s=7-W9i3gJAcCtrL7MzjJlG5LZ_91zeesYBT7g0rGrLh0&e=
On 04/30/2019 06:34 PM, Shain Miley wrote:
Hi,
We have a cluster with 235 osd's running version 12.2.11 with a
combination of 4 and 6 TB drives. The data distribution across osd's
varies from 52% to 94%.
I have been trying to figure out how to get this a bit more balanced as
we are running into 'backfillfull' issues on a regular basis.
I've tried adding more pgs...but this did not seem to do much in terms
of the imbalance.
Here is the end output from 'ceph osd df':
MIN/MAX VAR: 0.73/1.31 STDDEV: 7.73
We have 8199 pgs total with 6775 of them in the pool that has 97% of the
data.
The other pools are not really used (data, metadata, .rgw.root,
.rgw.control, etc). I have thought about deleting those unused pools so
that most if not all the pgs are being used by the pool with the
majority of the data.
However...before I do that...there anything else I can do or try in
order to see if I can balance out the data more uniformly?
Thanks in advance,
Shain
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.ceph.com_listinfo.cgi_ceph-2Dusers-2Dceph.com&d=DwICAg&c=E2nBno7hEddFhl23N5nD1Q&r=cqFccwnwHGRorPuRWs36Dw&m=1BfaF7xeFT_o8pdT9mrRmWm0gCn4wgalDi3UviTy24M&s=BczlpHmYiubLlNUhgDHcEsVHAsR_RYCKYV2G_5w2Vio&e=
--
NPR | Shain Miley | Manager of Infrastructure, Digital Media | smi...@npr.org |
202.513.3649
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
