In my test environment, the ceph version is v14.2.5, and there are two rgws, which are instances of two zones, respectively rgwA (master-zone) and rgwB (slave-zone). Cosbench reads, writes, and deletes to rgwA. , The final result rgwA has data residue, but rgwB has no residue. Looking at the log later, I found that this happened: 1. When rgwA deletes the object, the rgwA instance has not yet started datasync (or the process is slow) to synchronize the object in the slave-zone. 2. When rgwA starts data synchronization, rgwB has not deleted the object. In process 2, rgwA will retrieve the object from the slave-zone, and then rgwA will enter the incremental synchronization state to synchronize the bilog, but the bilog about the del object will be filtered out, because syncs_trace has master zone. Below I did a similar reproducing operation (both in the master version and ceph 14.2.5) rgwA and rgwB are two zones of the same zonegroup .rgwA and rgwB is running ( set rgw_run_sync_thread=true) rgwA and rgwB are two zones of the same zonegroup .rgwA and rgwB is running ( set rgw_run_sync_thread=true) t1: rgwA set rgw_run_sync_thread=false and restart it for it to take effect. We use s3cmd to create a bucket in rgwA. And upload an object1 in rgwA. We use s3cmd to observe whether object1 has been synchronized in rgwB. or look radosgw-admin bucket sync status is cauht up it. If the synchronization has passed, proceed to the next step. t2:rgwB set rgw_run_sync_thread=false and restart it for it to take effect. rgwA delete object1 . t3:rgwA set rgw_run_sync_thread=true and restart it for it to take effect. LOOK radosgw-admin bucket sync status is cauht up it. t4: rgwB set rgw_run_sync_thread=true and restart it for it to take effect. LOOK radosgw-admin bucket sync status is cauht up it . The reslut: rgwA has object1,rgwB dosen't have object1. This URL mentioned this problem https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/47555 Could someone can help me? or If the bucket about the rgwA instance is not in the incremental synchronization state, can we prohibit rgwA from deleting object1?
