Alright, I was finally able to get this resolved without adding another node.
As pointed out, even though I had a config variable that defined the default
replicated size at 2, ceph for some reason created the default pools (data,
and metadata) with a value of 3. After digging trough documentat
Christian Balzer writes:
> Read EVERYTHING you can find about crushmap rules.
>
> The quickstart (I think) talks about 3 storage nodes, not OSDs.
>
> Ceph is quite good when it comes to defining failure domains, the default
> is to segregate at the storage node level.
> What good is a replicati
On Wed, 2 Jul 2014 14:25:49 + (UTC) Brian Lovett wrote:
> Christian Balzer writes:
>
>
> > So either make sure these pools really have a replication of 2 by
> > deleting and re-creating them or add a third storage node.
>
>
>
> I just executed "ceph osd pool set {POOL} size 2" for both p
Gregory Farnum writes:
>
> On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Brian Lovett
> wrote:
> > "profile": "bobtail",
>
> Okay. That's unusual. What's the oldest client you need to support,
> and what Ceph version are you using? You probably want to set the
> crush tunables to "optimal"; the "bobta
Christian Balzer writes:
> So either make sure these pools really have a replication of 2 by deleting
> and re-creating them or add a third storage node.
I just executed "ceph osd pool set {POOL} size 2" for both pools. Anything
else I need to do? I still don't see any changes to the status
Hello,
Even though you did set the pool default size to 2 in your ceph
configuration, I think this value (and others) is ignored in the initial
setup, for the default pools.
So either make sure these pools really have a replication of 2 by deleting
and re-creating them or add a third storage nod
Gregory Farnum writes:
>
> On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Brian Lovett
> wrote:
> > "profile": "bobtail",
>
> Okay. That's unusual. What's the oldest client you need to support,
> and what Ceph version are you using?
This is a fresh install (as of today) running the latest firefly.
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Brian Lovett
wrote:
> "profile": "bobtail",
Okay. That's unusual. What's the oldest client you need to support,
and what Ceph version are you using? You probably want to set the
crush tunables to "optimal"; the "bobtail" ones are going to have all
kinds of is
Gregory Farnum writes:
> So those disks are actually different sizes, in proportion to their
> weights? It could be having an impact on this, although it *shouldn't*
> be an issue. And your tree looks like it's correct, which leaves me
> thinking that something is off about your crush rules. :/
>
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Brian Lovett
wrote:
> Gregory Farnum writes:
>
>> ...and one more time, because apparently my brain's out to lunch today:
>>
>> ceph osd tree
>>
>> *sigh*
>>
>
> haha, we all have those days.
>
> [root@monitor01 ceph]# ceph osd tree
> # idweight type name
Gregory Farnum writes:
> ...and one more time, because apparently my brain's out to lunch today:
>
> ceph osd tree
>
> *sigh*
>
haha, we all have those days.
[root@monitor01 ceph]# ceph osd tree
# idweight type name up/down reweight
-1 14.48 root default
-2 7.24
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Brian Lovett
> wrote:
>> Brian Lovett writes:
>>
>>
>> I restarted all of the osd's and noticed that ceph shows 2 osd's up even if
>> the servers are completely powered down: osdmap e95: 8 osds: 2 up, 8 in
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Brian Lovett
wrote:
> Brian Lovett writes:
>
>
> I restarted all of the osd's and noticed that ceph shows 2 osd's up even if
> the servers are completely powered down: osdmap e95: 8 osds: 2 up, 8 in
>
> Why would that be?
The OSDs report each other down much mor
Gregory Farnum writes:
>
> What's the output of "ceph osd map"?
>
> Your CRUSH map probably isn't trying to segregate properly, with 2
> hosts and 4 OSDs each.
> Software Engineer #42http://inktank.com | http://ceph.com
>
Is this what you are looking for?
ceph osd map rbd ceph
osdmap e1
Brian Lovett writes:
I restarted all of the osd's and noticed that ceph shows 2 osd's up even if
the servers are completely powered down: osdmap e95: 8 osds: 2 up, 8 in
Why would that be?
___
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
ht
What's the output of "ceph osd map"?
Your CRUSH map probably isn't trying to segregate properly, with 2
hosts and 4 OSDs each.
Software Engineer #42 @ http://inktank.com | http://ceph.com
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Brian Lovett
wrote:
> I'm pulling my hair out with ceph. I am testing thin
I'm pulling my hair out with ceph. I am testing things with a 5 server
cluster. I have 3 monitors, and two storage machines each with 4 osd's. I
have started from scratch 4 times now, and can't seem to figure out how to
get a clean status. Ceph health reports:
HEALTH_WARN 34 pgs degraded; 192
17 matches
Mail list logo
