Hi David,
Here is the output of ceph df. We have lot of space in our ceph cluster. We
have 2 OSDs (266,500) down earlier due to hardware issue and never got a
chance to fix them.
GLOBAL:
SIZE AVAIL RAW USED %RAW USED
1101T 701T 400T 36.37
POOLS:
NAME
What's your `ceph osd tree`, `ceph df`, `ceph osd df`? You sound like you
just have a fairly fill cluster that you haven't balanced the crush weights
on.
On Fri, May 11, 2018, 10:06 PM Pardhiv Karri wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Thanks for the reply. Yeah we are seeing that
Hi David,
Thanks for the reply. Yeah we are seeing that 0.0001 usage on pretty much
on all OSDs. But this node it is different whether full weight or just
0.2of OSD 611 the OSD 611 start increasing.
--Pardhiv K
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 10:50 AM, David Turner
wrote:
>
Hi Bryan,
Thank you for the reply.
We are on Hammer, ceph version 0.94.9
(fe6d859066244b97b24f09d46552afc2071e6f90)
We tried with full weight on all OSDs on that node and the OSDs like 611
are going above 90% so downsized and tested with only 0.2
Our PGs are at 119 for all 12 pools in the
There was a time in the history of Ceph where a weight of 0.0 was not
always what you thought. People had better experiences with crush weights
of something like 0.0001 or something. This is just a memory tickling in
the back of my mind of things I've read on the ML years back.
On Fri, May 11,
> We have a large 1PB ceph cluster. We recently added 6 nodes with 16 2TB disks
> each to the cluster. All the 5 nodes rebalanced well without any issues and
> the sixth/last node OSDs started acting weird as I increase weight of one osd
> the utilization doesn't change but a different osd on the
Hi,
We have a large 1PB ceph cluster. We recently added 6 nodes with 16 2TB
disks each to the cluster. All the 5 nodes rebalanced well without any
issues and the sixth/last node OSDs started acting weird as I increase
weight of one osd the utilization doesn't change but a different osd on the