[ceph-users] CRUSH rule seems to work fine not for all PGs in erasure coded pools

David Turner drakonstein at gmail.com
Thu Nov 30 05:45:45 PST 2017


active+clean+remapped is not a healthy state for a PG. If it actually we're
going to a new osd it would say backfill+wait or backfilling and eventually
would get back to active+clean.

I'm not certain what the active+clean+remapped state means. Perhaps a PG
query, PG dump, etc can give more insight. In any case, this is not a
healthy state and you're still testing removing a node to have less than
you need to be healthy.

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017, 5:38 AM Jakub Jaszewski <jaszewski.jakub at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I've just did ceph upgrade jewel -> luminous and am facing the same case...
>
> # EC profile
> crush-failure-domain=host
> crush-root=default
> jerasure-per-chunk-alignment=false
> k=3
> m=2
> plugin=jerasure
> technique=reed_sol_van
> w=8
>
> 5 hosts in the cluster and I run systemctl stop ceph.target on one of them
> some PGs from EC pool were remapped (active+clean+remapped state) even
> when there was not enough hosts in the cluster but some are still in
> active+undersized+degraded state
>
>
> root at host01:~# ceph status
>   cluster:
>     id:     a6f73750-1972-47f6-bcf5-a99753be65ad
>     health: HEALTH_WARN
>             Degraded data redundancy: 876/9115 objects degraded (9.611%),
> 540 pgs unclean, 540 pgs degraded, 540 pgs undersized
>
>   services:
>     mon: 3 daemons, quorum host01,host02,host03
>     mgr: host01(active), standbys: host02, host03
>     osd: 60 osds: 48 up, 48 in; 484 remapped pgs
>     rgw: 3 daemons active
>
>   data:
>     pools:   19 pools, 3736 pgs
>     objects: 1965 objects, 306 MB
>     usage:   5153 MB used, 174 TB / 174 TB avail
>     pgs:     876/9115 objects degraded (9.611%)
>              2712 active+clean
>              540  active+undersized+degraded
>              484  active+clean+remapped
>
>   io:
>     client:   17331 B/s rd, 20 op/s rd, 0 op/s wr
>
> root at host01:~#
>
>
>
> Anyone here able to explain this behavior to me ?
>
> Jakub
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> ceph-users at lists.ceph.com
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/attachments/20171130/83392c6d/attachment.html>


More information about the ceph-users mailing list