Hi all
Something to try:
ceph config set mgr mgr/balancer/upmap_max_iterations 20
(Default is 100.)
Cheers
Harry
On 03.12.19 08:02, Lars Täuber wrote:
BTW: The osdmaptool doesn't see anything to do either:
$ ceph osd getmap -o om
$ osdmaptool om --upmap /tmp/upmap.sh --upmap-pool
BTW: The osdmaptool doesn't see anything to do either:
$ ceph osd getmap -o om
$ osdmaptool om --upmap /tmp/upmap.sh --upmap-pool cephfs_data
osdmaptool: osdmap file 'om'
writing upmap command output to: /tmp/upmap.sh
checking for upmap cleanups
upmap, max-count 100, max deviation 0.01
limiting
Hi Konstantin,
Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:01:34 +0700
Konstantin Shalygin ==> Lars Täuber ,
ceph-users@ceph.io :
> Please paste your `ceph osd df tree`, `ceph osd pool ls detail`, `ceph
> osd crush rule dump`.
here it comes:
$ ceph osd df tree
ID CLASS WEIGHTREWEIGHT SIZERAW USE DATA
On 12/2/19 5:56 PM, Francois Legrand wrote:
For replica, what is the best way to change crush profile ? Is it to
create a new replica profile, and set this profile as crush rulest for
the pool (something like ceph osd pool set {pool-name} crush_ruleset
my_new_rule) ?
Indeed. Then you can
On 12/2/19 5:55 PM, Lars Täuber wrote:
Here we have a similar situation.
After adding some OSDs to the cluster the PGs are not equally distributed over
the OSDs.
The balancing mode is set to upmap.
The docshttps://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/rados/operations/balancer/#modes say:
"This CRUSH
On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 4:55 PM Simon Ironside wrote:
>
> Any word on 14.2.5? Nervously waiting here . . .
real soon, the release is 99% done (check the corresponding thread on
the devel mailing list)
Paul
>
> Thanks,
> Simon.
>
> On 18/11/2019 11:29, Simon Ironside wrote:
>
> > I will sit
I've recently configured something like this for a backup cluster with
these settings:
ceph osd pool set cache_test hit_set_type bloom
ceph osd pool set cache_test hit_set_count 1
ceph osd pool set cache_test hit_set_period 7200
ceph osd pool set cache_test target_max_bytes 1
ceph osd
Hi Robert,
I am not quite sure if I get your question correct, but what I understand
is that you want the inbound writes to land on the cache tier, which
presumably would be on a faster media, possibily a ssd.
>From there you would want it to trickle down to the base tier, which is a
EC pool
I'd like to configure a cache tier to act as a write buffer, so that if
writes come in, it promotes objects, but reads never promote an object. We
have a lot of cold data so we would like to tier down to an EC pool
(CephFS) after a period of about 30 days to save space. The storage tier
and the
Yes Luis, good guess!! ;)
-Original Message-
Cc: ceph-users
Subject: Re: [ceph-users] ceph node crashed with these errors "kernel:
ceph: build_snap_context" (maybe now it is urgent?)
On Mon, Dec 02, 2019 at 10:27:21AM +0100, Marc Roos wrote:
>
> I have been asking before[1]. Since
Any word on 14.2.5? Nervously waiting here . . .
Thanks,
Simon.
On 18/11/2019 11:29, Simon Ironside wrote:
I will sit tight and wait for 14.2.5.
Thanks again,
Simon.
___
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to
I can confirm that removing all the snapshots seems to resolve the
problem.
A - I would propose a redesign of something like that snapshots from
below the mountpoint are only taken into account and not snapshots in
the entire filesystem. That should fix a lot of issues
B - That reminds me
>
>> >
>> >ISTR there were some anti-spam measures put in place. Is your
account
>> >waiting for manual approval? If so, David should be able to help.
>>
>> Yes if I remember correctly I get waiting approval when I try to log
in.
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Dec 1 03:14:36 c04
On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 1:23 PM Marc Roos wrote:
>
>
>
> I guess this is related? kworker 100%
>
>
> [Mon Dec 2 13:05:27 2019] SysRq : Show backtrace of all active CPUs
> [Mon Dec 2 13:05:27 2019] sending NMI to all CPUs:
> [Mon Dec 2 13:05:27 2019] NMI backtrace for cpu 0 skipped: idling at pc
On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 12:48 PM Marc Roos wrote:
>
>
> Hi Ilya,
>
> >
> >
> >ISTR there were some anti-spam measures put in place. Is your account
> >waiting for manual approval? If so, David should be able to help.
>
> Yes if I remember correctly I get waiting approval when I try to log
On 2019-12-02 14:22, Nathan Fish wrote:
You may be thinking of "lazytime". "relatime" only updates atime when
updating mtime, to prevent being inconsistent.
I was thinking about the behaviour of relatime on kernels since 2.6.30 (quoting
mount(8)):
"Update inode access
You may be thinking of "lazytime". "relatime" only updates atime when
updating mtime, to prevent being inconsistent.
On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 4:46 AM Oliver Freyermuth
wrote:
>
> Dear Cephers,
>
> we are currently mounting CephFS with relatime, using the FUSE client
> (version 13.2.6):
>
Hello,
I'm trying to wrap my head around how having a multi-site (two zones in
one zonegroup) with multiple placement
targets but only wanting to replicate some placement targets would work.
Can you setup a zonegroup with two zones and it would only replicate the
placement targets that the
I guess this is related? kworker 100%
[Mon Dec 2 13:05:27 2019] SysRq : Show backtrace of all active CPUs
[Mon Dec 2 13:05:27 2019] sending NMI to all CPUs:
[Mon Dec 2 13:05:27 2019] NMI backtrace for cpu 0 skipped: idling at pc
0xb0581e94
[Mon Dec 2 13:05:27 2019] NMI backtrace
Hi Ilya,
>
>
>ISTR there were some anti-spam measures put in place. Is your account
>waiting for manual approval? If so, David should be able to help.
Yes if I remember correctly I get waiting approval when I try to log in.
>>
>>
>>
>> Dec 1 03:14:36 c04 kernel: ceph:
Em dom., 1 de dez. de 2019 às 09:05, Erdem Agaoglu
escreveu:
>
> Hi Rodrigo,
>
> The fact that you're getting logs from mon and the function name set_mon_vals
> suggests that you made use of mon provided centralized config, like `ceph
> config set osd cluster_network x.x.x.x` but it seems
Hi,
2 years after my issue [ https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/22928 |
https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/22928 ] the next one fires back.
The Problem:
Old Buckets have their index and data in rgw.buckets:
root@cephrgw01:~# radosgw-admin metadata get bucket:testtesttesty
{
"key":
On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 10:27 AM Marc Roos wrote:
>
>
> I have been asking before[1]. Since Nautilus upgrade I am having these,
> with a total node failure as a result(?). Was not expecting this in my
> 'low load' setup. Maybe now someone can help resolving this? I am also
> waiting quite some
Thanks.
For replica, what is the best way to change crush profile ? Is it to
create a new replica profile, and set this profile as crush rulest for
the pool (something like ceph osd pool set {pool-name} crush_ruleset
my_new_rule) ?
For erasure coding, I would thus have to change the profile
Hi there!
Here we have a similar situation.
After adding some OSDs to the cluster the PGs are not equally distributed over
the OSDs.
The balancing mode is set to upmap.
The docs https://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/rados/operations/balancer/#modes say:
"This CRUSH mode will optimize the placement
I am getting these every 2 seconds, does it make sense to log this?
log_channel(cluster) log [DBG] : pgmap v32653: 384 pgs: 2
active+clean+scrubbing+deep, 382 active+clean;
log_channel(cluster) log [DBG] : pgmap v32653: 384 pgs: 2
active+clean+scrubbing+deep, 382 active+clean;
Hello, Ceph users,
does anybody use Ceph on recently released CentOS 8? Apparently there are
no el8 packages neither at download.ceph.com, nor in the native CentOS package
tree. I am thinking about upgrading my cluster to C8 (because of other
software running on it apart from Ceph). Do
Dear Cephers,
we are currently mounting CephFS with relatime, using the FUSE client (version
13.2.6):
ceph-fuse on /cephfs type fuse.ceph-fuse
(rw,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0,allow_other)
For the first time, I wanted to use atime to identify old unused data. My expectation
with
I have been asking before[1]. Since Nautilus upgrade I am having these,
with a total node failure as a result(?). Was not expecting this in my
'low load' setup. Maybe now someone can help resolving this? I am also
waiting quite some time to get access at
https://tracker.ceph.com/issues.
I have gpt. Disks are created with the old ceph-disk tool. Why is such a
major thing not being handled for 3 months? I was scared shitless when
this node went down and did not come up.
[@c04 tmp]# fdisk -l /dev/sdb
WARNING: fdisk GPT support is currently new, and therefore in an
Mandi! Marc Roos
In chel di` si favelave...
> Node does not start osds! Why do I have this error? Previous boot was
> just fine (upgraded recently to nautilus)
See if this is your case:
https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/41777
--
dott. Marco Gaiarin
31 matches
Mail list logo
