l use cases. I am looking for best practices and in
general just trying to avoid any obvious mistakes.
Any advice is much appreciated.
Sincerely
Niklaus Hofer
--
stepping stone AG
Wasserwerkgasse 7
CH-3011 Bern
Telefon: +41 31 332 53 63
www.stepping-stone.ch
niklaus.ho...@stepping-sto
n my pools!)?
Sincerely
Niklaus Hofer
--
stepping stone AG
Wasserwerkgasse 7
CH-3011 Bern
Telefon: +41 31 332 53 63
www.stepping-stone.ch
niklaus.ho...@stepping-stone.ch
___
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io
To unsubscribe send an email to cep
too. Glad to hear others are thinking alike.
I think I saw an object map with 1.3M object references, so I guess
50'000 might still be too high. But we'll probably do 50'000 anyway at
first and see whether it helps at all.
I'll definitely let you know how it's going!
S
that pool.
Now I have 167 omap objects that are not quite as big, but still too large.
Sincerely
Niklaus Hofer
On 19/06/2025 14.48, Eugen Block wrote:
Hi,
the warnings about large omap objects are reported when deep-scrubs
happen. So if you resharded the bucket (or Ceph did that for you
uld reduce `rgw_max_objs_per_shard`
from 100'000 to something like 10'000 to have the buckets resharded more
aggressively?
But then again, that assumes a lot. For example, that assumes that the
num_objects counter in the bucket stats does not count up on versioned
objects. So
Dear Eugen
My hero! This resolved this issue - the warnings are now gone.
We did try to restart the mons before, but never thought to restart the
mgrs...
Sincerely
Niklaus Hofer
On 19/06/2025 14.52, Eugen Block wrote:
Default question: have you tried to fail the mgr? ;-)
ceph mgr fail
PGs into the queue, it doesn't mean they will be
scrubbed immediately. And depending on the PG size, the scrubbing can
take some time, too.
I did check the OSD logs at the time, so yes, I can confirm that they
all went through.
Sincerely
Niklaus Hofer
Zitat von Niklaus Hofer :
Hi
Just letting you know the situation has been resolved. The bucket is no
longer in status processing. I didn't end up needing to do anything,
just wait for long enough. In the end it was like 60 hours.
Sincerely
Niklaus Hofer
On 24/06/2025 08.35, Niklaus Hofer wrote:
Dear all
I ma
question has been asked before on this ML [1] but in that
thread, the bucket reverted back to UNINITIAL. I was hoping that maybe
it would be the same here, but after waiting for a good while, I've lost
hope on that...
Many thanks in advance
Niklaus Hofer
Links:
[1] https://www.mail-arch
