Re: Failed OSDs not getting marked down or out

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Mar 2015, Matt Conner wrote:
>> I'm working with a 6 rack, 18 server (3 racks of 2 servers , 3 racks
>> of 4 servers), 640 OSD cluster and have run into an issue when failing
>> a storage server or rack where the OSDs are not getting marked down
>> until the monitor timeout is reached - typically resulting in all
>> writes being blocked until the timeout.
>>
>> Each of our storage servers contains 36 OSDs, so in order to prevent a
>> server from marking a OSD out (in case of network issues), we have set
>> our "mon_osd_min_down_reporters" value to 37. This value is working
>> great for a smaller cluster, but unfortunately seems to not work so
>> well in this large cluster. Tailing the monitor logs I can see that
>> the monitor is only receiving failed reports from 9-10 unique OSDs per
>> failed OSD.
>>
>> I've played around with "osd_heartbeat_min_peers", and it seems to
>> help, but I still run into issues where an OSD is not marked down. Can
>> anyone explain how the number of heartbeat peers is determined and
>> how, if necessary, I can can use "osd_heartbeat_min_peers" to ensure I
>> have enough peering to detect failures in large clusters?
>
> The peers are normally determined why which other OSDs we share a PG with.
> Increasing pg_num for your pools will tend to increase this.  It looks
> like osd_heartbeat_min_peers will do the same (to be honest I don't think
> I've ever had to use it for this), so I'm not sure why that isn't
> resolving the problem.  Maybe make sure it is set significantly higher
> than 36?  It may simply be that several of the random choices were within
> the same host so that when it goes down there still aren't enough peers
> to mark things down.
>
> Alternatively, you can give up on the mon_osd_min_down_reporters tweak.
> It sounds like it creates more problems than it solves...

This normally works out okay; in particular I'd expect a lot more than
10 peer OSDs in a cluster of this size. What's your CRUSH map and
ruleset look like? How many pools and PGs?
-Greg
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [CEPH Users]     [Ceph Large]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux BTRFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux