On 16 May 2016 16:36, "John Spray" <jsp...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Andrus, Brian Contractor > <bdand...@nps.edu> wrote: > > Both client and server are Jewel 10.2.0 > > So the fuse client, correct? If you are up for investigating further, > with potential client bugs (or performance issues) it is often useful > to compare the fuse vs. kernel clients (using the most recent kernel > you can) to work out what's misbehaving. > > > "All kinds of issues" include that EVERY node ended up with the cache pressure message, even if they had done no access at all. > > Hmm, interesting. I wonder if we do have a bug where inactive clients > are being "unfairly" asked to clear some cache content but are > appearing not to do so because there isn't anything much in their > cache. To be clear, when you say "no access at all", you mean a > client that was mounted and then just sat there (i.e. not even an ls), > right? > > Are any of the clients holding a lot of files open? Roughly what is > the workload doing? >
Could it be updatedb on the clients? Check that the right types are in PRUNEFS and mount point is in PRUNEPATHS. -- Dan
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
