Any updates on when this is going to be released?

Daniel

On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 3:51 AM, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub <yeh...@redhat.com>
wrote:

> Yes, so it seems. The librados::nobjects_begin() call expects at least a
> Hammer (0.94) backend. Probably need to add a try/catch there to catch this
> issue, and maybe see if using a different api would be better compatible
> with older backends.
>
> Yehuda
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Anthony Alba" <ascanio.al...@gmail.com>
> > To: "Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub" <yeh...@redhat.com>
> > Cc: "Ben" <b@benjackson.email>, "ceph-users" <ceph-us...@ceph.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2015 10:14:38 AM
> > Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Shadow Files
> >
> > Unfortunately it immediately aborted (running against a 0.80.9 Ceph).
> > Does Ceph also have to be a 0.94 level?
> >
> > last error was
> >    -3> 2015-05-06 01:11:11.710947 7f311dd15880  0 run(): building
> > index of all objects in pool
> >     -2> 2015-05-06 01:11:11.710995 7f311dd15880  1 --
> > 10.200.3.92:0/1001510 --> 10.200.3.32:6800/1870 --
> > osd_op(client.4065115.0:27 ^A/ [pgnls start_epoch 0] 11.0 ack+read
> > +known_if_redirected e952) v5 -- ?+0 0x39a4e80 con 0x39a4aa0
> >     -1> 2015-05-06 01:11:11.712125 7f31026f4700  1 --
> > 10.200.3.92:0/1001510 <== osd.1 10.200.3.32:6800/1870 1 ====
> > osd_op_reply(27  [pgnls start_epoch 0] v934'6252 uv6252
> > ondisk = -22 ((22) Invalid argument)) v6 ==== 167+0+0 (3260127617 0 0)
> > 0x7f30c4000a90 con 0x39a4aa0
> >      0> 2015-05-06 01:11:11.712652 7f311dd15880 -1 *** Caught signal
> > (Aborted) **
> >  in thread 7f311dd15880
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2015-05-06 01:11:11.710947 7f311dd15880  0 run(): building index of
> > all objects in pool
> > terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::runtime_error'
> >   what():  rados returned (22) Invalid argument
> > *** Caught signal (Aborted) **
> >  in thread 7f311dd15880
> >  ceph version 0.94-1339-gc905d51
> (c905d517c2c778a88b006302996591b60d167cb6)
> >  1: radosgw-admin() [0x61e604]
> >  2: (()+0xf130) [0x7f311a59f130]
> >  3: (gsignal()+0x37) [0x7f31195d85d7]
> >  4: (abort()+0x148) [0x7f31195d9cc8]
> >  5: (__gnu_cxx::__verbose_terminate_handler()+0x165) [0x7f3119edc9b5]
> >  6: (()+0x5e926) [0x7f3119eda926]
> >  7: (()+0x5e953) [0x7f3119eda953]
> >  8: (()+0x5eb73) [0x7f3119edab73]
> >  9: (()+0x4d116) [0x7f311b606116]
> >  10: (librados::IoCtx::nobjects_begin()+0x2e) [0x7f311b60c60e]
> >  11: (RGWOrphanSearch::build_all_oids_index()+0x62) [0x516a02]
> >  12: (RGWOrphanSearch::run()+0x1e3) [0x51ad23]
> >  13: (main()+0xa430) [0x4fbc30]
> >  14: (__libc_start_main()+0xf5) [0x7f31195c4af5]
> >  15: radosgw-admin() [0x5028d9]
> > 2015-05-06 01:11:11.712652 7f311dd15880 -1 *** Caught signal (Aborted) **
> >  in thread 7f311dd15880
> >
> >  ceph version 0.94-1339-gc905d51
> (c905d517c2c778a88b006302996591b60d167cb6)
> >  1: radosgw-admin() [0x61e604]
> >  2: (()+0xf130) [0x7f311a59f130]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
> > <yeh...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > Can you try creating the .log pool?
> > >
> > > Yehda
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > >> From: "Anthony Alba" <ascanio.al...@gmail.com>
> > >> To: "Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub" <yeh...@redhat.com>
> > >> Cc: "Ben" <b@benjackson.email>, "ceph-users" <ceph-us...@ceph.com>
> > >> Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2015 3:37:15 AM
> > >> Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Shadow Files
> > >>
> > >> ...sorry clicked send to quickly
> > >>
> > >> /opt/ceph/bin/radosgw-admin orphans find --pool=.rgw.buckets
> --job-id=abcd
> > >> ERROR: failed to open log pool ret=-2
> > >> job not found
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Anthony Alba <ascanio.al...@gmail.com
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > Hi Yehuda,
> > >> >
> > >> > First run:
> > >> >
> > >> > /opt/ceph/bin/radosgw-admin  --pool=.rgw.buckets --job-id=testing
> > >> > ERROR: failed to open log pool ret=-2
> > >> > job not found
> > >> >
> > >> > Do I have to precreate some pool?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 8:17 AM, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
> > >> > <yeh...@redhat.com>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I've been working on a new tool that would detect leaked rados
> objects.
> > >> >> It
> > >> >> will take some time for it to be merged into an official release,
> or
> > >> >> even
> > >> >> into the master branch, but if anyone likes to play with it, it is
> in
> > >> >> the
> > >> >> wip-rgw-orphans branch.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> At the moment I recommend to not remove any object that the tool
> > >> >> reports,
> > >> >> but rather move it to a different pool for backup (using the rados
> tool
> > >> >> cp command).
> > >> >>
> > >> >> The tool works in a few stages:
> > >> >> (1) list all the rados objects in the specified pool, store in
> > >> >> repository
> > >> >> (2) list all bucket instances in the system, store in repository
> > >> >> (3) iterate through bucket instances in repository, list (logical)
> > >> >> objects, for each object store the expected rados objects that
> build it
> > >> >> (4) compare data from (1) and (3), each object that is in (1), but
> not
> > >> >> in
> > >> >> (3), stat, if older than $start_time - $stale_period, report it
> > >> >>
> > >> >> There can be lot's of things that can go wrong with this, so we
> really
> > >> >> need to be careful here.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> The tool can be run by the following command:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> $ radosgw-admin orphans find --pool=<data pool> --job-id=<name>
> > >> >> [--num-shards=<num shards>] [--orphan-stale-secs=<seconds>]
> > >> >>
> > >> >> The tool can be stopped, and restarted, and it will continue from
> the
> > >> >> stage where it stopped. Note that some of the stages will restart
> from
> > >> >> the beginning (of the stages), due to system limitation
> (specifically
> > >> >> 1,
> > >> >> 2).
> > >> >>
> > >> >> In order to clean up a job's data:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> $ radosgw-admin orphans finish --job-id=<name>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Note that the jobs run in the radosgw-admin process context, it
> does
> > >> >> not
> > >> >> schedule a job on the radosgw process.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Please let me know of any issue you find.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Thanks,
> > >> >> Yehuda
> > >> >>
> > >> >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> >>> From: "Ben Hines" <bhi...@gmail.com>
> > >> >>> To: "Ben" <b@benjackson.email>
> > >> >>> Cc: "Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub" <yeh...@redhat.com>, "ceph-users"
> > >> >>> <ceph-us...@ceph.com>
> > >> >>> Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 3:00:16 PM
> > >> >>> Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Shadow Files
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Going to hold off on our 94.1 update for this issue
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Hopefully this can make it into a 94.2 or a v95 git release.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> -Ben
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Ben < b@benjackson.email >
> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> How long are you thinking here?
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> We added more storage to our cluster to overcome these issues,
> and we
> > >> >>> can't
> > >> >>> keep throwing storage at it until the issues are fixed.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On 28/04/15 01:49, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> It will get to the ceph mainline eventually. We're still
> reviewing and
> > >> >>> testing the fix, and there's more work to be done on the cleanup
> tool.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Yehuda
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> From: "Ben" <b@benjackson.email>
> > >> >>> To: "Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub" < yeh...@redhat.com >
> > >> >>> Cc: "ceph-users" < ceph-us...@ceph.com >
> > >> >>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2015 11:02:23 PM
> > >> >>> Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Shadow Files
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Are these fixes going to make it into the repository versions of
> ceph,
> > >> >>> or will we be required to compile and install manually?
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On 2015-04-26 02:29, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Yeah, that's definitely something that we'd address soon.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Yehuda
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> From: "Ben" <b@benjackson.email>
> > >> >>> To: "Ben Hines" < bhi...@gmail.com >, "Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub"
> > >> >>> < yeh...@redhat.com >
> > >> >>> Cc: "ceph-users" < ceph-us...@ceph.com >
> > >> >>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:14:11 PM
> > >> >>> Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Shadow Files
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Definitely need something to help clear out these old shadow
> files.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I'm sure our cluster has around 100TB of these shadow files.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I've written a script to go through known objects to get prefixes
> of
> > >> >>> objects
> > >> >>> that should exist to compare to ones that shouldn't, but the time
> it
> > >> >>> takes
> > >> >>> to do this over millions and millions of objects is just too long.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On 25/04/15 09:53, Ben Hines wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> When these are fixed it would be great to get good steps for
> listing /
> > >> >>> cleaning up any orphaned objects. I have suspicions this is
> affecting
> > >> >>> us.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> thanks-
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> -Ben
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub <
> > >> >>> yeh...@redhat.com >
> > >> >>> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> These ones:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/10295
> > >> >>> http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11447
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> From: "Ben Jackson" <b@benjackson.email>
> > >> >>> To: "Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub" < yeh...@redhat.com >
> > >> >>> Cc: "ceph-users" < ceph-us...@ceph.com >
> > >> >>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 3:06:02 PM
> > >> >>> Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Shadow Files
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> We were firefly, then we upgraded to giant, now we are on hammer.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> What issues?
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On 25 Apr 2015 2:12 am, Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub < yeh...@redhat.com
> >
> > >> >>> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> What version are you running? There are two different issues that
> we
> > >> >>> were
> > >> >>> fixing this week, and we should have that upstream pretty soon.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Yehuda
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> From: "Ben" <b@benjackson.email>
> > >> >>> To: "ceph-users" < ceph-us...@ceph.com >
> > >> >>> Cc: "Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub" < yeh...@redhat.com >
> > >> >>> Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 7:42:06 PM
> > >> >>> Subject: [ceph-users] Shadow Files
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> We are still experiencing a problem with out gateway not properly
> > >> >>> clearing out shadow files.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I have done numerous tests where I have:
> > >> >>> -Uploaded a file of 1.5GB in size using s3browser application
> > >> >>> -Done an object stat on the file to get its prefix
> > >> >>> -Done rados ls -p .rgw.buckets | grep <prefix> to count the number
> > >> >>> of
> > >> >>> shadow files associated (in this case it is around 290 shadow
> files)
> > >> >>> -Deleted said file with s3browser
> > >> >>> -Performed a gc list, which shows the ~290 files listed
> > >> >>> -Waited 24 hours to redo the rados ls -p .rgw.buckets | grep
> > >> >>> <prefix>
> > >> >>> to
> > >> >>> recount the shadow files only to be left with 290 files still
> there
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> From log output /var/log/ceph/radosgw.log, I can see the following
> > >> >>> when
> > >> >>> clicking DELETE (this appears 290 times)
> > >> >>> 2015-04-24 10:43:29.996523 7f0b0afb5700 0
> > >> >>> RGWObjManifest::operator++():
> > >> >>> result: ofs=4718592 stripe_ofs=4718592 part_ofs=0
> rule->part_size=0
> > >> >>> 2015-04-24 10:43:29.996557 7f0b0afb5700 0
> > >> >>> RGWObjManifest::operator++():
> > >> >>> result: ofs=8912896 stripe_ofs=8912896 part_ofs=0
> rule->part_size=0
> > >> >>> 2015-04-24 10:43:29.996564 7f0b0afb5700 0
> > >> >>> RGWObjManifest::operator++():
> > >> >>> result: ofs= 13107200 stripe_ofs= 13107200 part_ofs=0
> > >> >>> rule->part_size=0
> > >> >>> 2015-04-24 10:43:29.996570 7f0b0afb5700 0
> > >> >>> RGWObjManifest::operator++():
> > >> >>> result: ofs=17301504 stripe_ofs=17301504 part_ofs=0
> > >> >>> rule->part_size=0
> > >> >>> 2015-04-24 10:43:29.996576 7f0b0afb5700 0
> > >> >>> RGWObjManifest::operator++():
> > >> >>> result: ofs=21495808 stripe_ofs=21495808 part_ofs=0
> > >> >>> rule->part_size=0
> > >> >>> 2015-04-24 10:43:29.996581 7f0b0afb5700 0
> > >> >>> RGWObjManifest::operator++():
> > >> >>> result: ofs=25690112 stripe_ofs=25690112 part_ofs=0
> > >> >>> rule->part_size=0
> > >> >>> 2015-04-24 10:43:29.996586 7f0b0afb5700 0
> > >> >>> RGWObjManifest::operator++():
> > >> >>> result: ofs=29884416 stripe_ofs=29884416 part_ofs=0
> > >> >>> rule->part_size=0
> > >> >>> 2015-04-24 10:43:29.996592 7f0b0afb5700 0
> > >> >>> RGWObjManifest::operator++():
> > >> >>> result: ofs=34078720 stripe_ofs=34078720 part_ofs=0
> > >> >>> rule->part_size=0
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> In this same log, I also see the gc process saying it is removing
> > >> >>> said
> > >> >>> file (these records appear 290 times too)
> > >> >>> 2015-04-23 14:16:27.926952 7f15be0ee700 0 gc::process: removing
> > >> >>> .rgw.buckets:<objectname>
> > >> >>> 2015-04-23 14:16:27.928572 7f15be0ee700 0 gc::process: removing
> > >> >>> .rgw.buckets:<objectname>
> > >> >>> 2015-04-23 14:16:27.929636 7f15be0ee700 0 gc::process: removing
> > >> >>> .rgw.buckets:<objectname>
> > >> >>> 2015-04-23 14:16:27.930448 7f15be0ee700 0 gc::process: removing
> > >> >>> .rgw.buckets:<objectname>
> > >> >>> 2015-04-23 14:16:27.931226 7f15be0ee700 0 gc::process: removing
> > >> >>> .rgw.buckets:<objectname>
> > >> >>> 2015-04-23 14:16:27.932103 7f15be0ee700 0 gc::process: removing
> > >> >>> .rgw.buckets:<objectname>
> > >> >>> 2015-04-23 14:16:27.933470 7f15be0ee700 0 gc::process: removing
> > >> >>> .rgw.buckets:<objectname>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> So even though it appears that the GC is processing its removal,
> the
> > >> >>> shadow files remain!
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Please help!
> > >> >>> _______________________________________________
> > >> >>> ceph-users mailing list
> > >> >>> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> > >> >>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> _______________________________________________
> > >> >>> ceph-users mailing list
> > >> >>> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> > >> >>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> _______________________________________________
> > >> >>> ceph-users mailing list
> > >> >>> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> > >> >>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> _______________________________________________
> > >> >>> ceph-users mailing list
> > >> >>> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> > >> >>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> _______________________________________________
> > >> >>> ceph-users mailing list
> > >> >>> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> > >> >>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> _______________________________________________
> > >> >>> ceph-users mailing list
> > >> >>> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> > >> >>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> _______________________________________________
> > >> >>> ceph-users mailing list
> > >> >>> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> > >> >>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> > >> >>>
> > >> >> _______________________________________________
> > >> >> ceph-users mailing list
> > >> >> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> > >> >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> ceph-users mailing list
> > >> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> > >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> > >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > ceph-users mailing list
> > ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
> >
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list
> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
>
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Reply via email to