Hi Patrick,
I'm not sure that its exactly the same issue. I observed that "ceph tell
mds.xyz session ls" had all counters 0. On Friday before we had a power loss on
a rack that took out a JBOD with a few meta-data disks and I suspect that the
reporting of zeroes started after this crash. No
On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 02:37:59PM -0400, Matt Benjamin wrote:
> Yes, it's also strongly consistent. It's also last writer wins, though, so
> two clients somehow permitted to contend for updating policy could
> overwrite each other's changes, just as with objects.
Hi, thank you for confirming
Hello,
That was solved in 16.2.11 in tracker [1] with fix [2].
Best regards
Tobias
[1] https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/55765
[2] https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/47194/commits
> On 12 Sep 2023, at 05:29, Louis Koo wrote:
>
> radosgw crash again with:
> ceph version 16.2.10
Hi Igor,
I recreated the log with full debugging enabled.
https://www.konsec.com/download/full-debug-20-ceph-osd.43.log.gz
and another without the debug settings
https://www.konsec.com/download/failed-ceph-osd.43.log.gz
I hope you can draw some conclusions from it and I am looking forward to
Hello Sam,
i did start with an Ceph Jewel and Centos 7 (POC) cluster in mid 2017 now
successfully running latest Quincy version 17.2.6 in production. BUT, we
had to do a recreation of all OSDs (DB/WAL) from Filstore to Bluestore and
later once again for Centos 8 host migration. :-/
Major step
Hi Igor,
> On 12 Sep 2023, at 15:28, Igor Fedotov wrote:
>
> Default hybrid allocator (as well as AVL one it's based on) could take
> dramatically long time to allocate pretty large (hundreds of MBs) 64K-aligned
> chunks for BlueFS. At the original cluster it was exposed as 20-30 sec OSD
>
Hey Konstantin,
forget to mention - indeed clusters having 4K bluestore min alloc size
are more likely to be exposed to the issue. The key point is the
difference between bluestore and bluefs allocation sizes. The issue
likely to pop-up when user and DB data are collocated but different
HI All,
as promised here is a postmortem analysis on what happened.
the following ticket (https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/62815) with
accompanying materials provide a low-level overview on the issue.
In a few words it is as follows:
Default hybrid allocator (as well as AVL one it's based
Another the possibility is also the ceph mon discovery via DNS:
https://docs.ceph.com/en/quincy/rados/configuration/mon-lookup-dns/#looking-up-monitors-through-dns
Regards, Joachim
___
ceph ambassador DACH
ceph consultant since 2012
Clyso GmbH - Premier Ceph
Thank you Nicola,
We are collecting these feedbacks. For a while we weren't focusing on the
mobile view
of the dashboard. If there are users using those, we'll look into it as
well. Will let everyone know
soon with the improvements in the UI.
Regards,
Nizam
On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 2:23 PM
No, it's a flag you (or someone else?) set before shutting down the
cluster, look at your initial email, there were multiple flags set:
pauserd,pausewr,nodown,noout,nobackfill,norebalance,norecover
flag(s) set
When you bring your cluster back online you should unset those flags.
Zitat von
11 matches
Mail list logo
