Re: rgw: Is rgw_sync_lease_period=120s set small?

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

 



radosgw-admin sync error list
[
    {
        "shard_id": 0,
        "entries": [
            {
                "id": "1_1614333890.956965_8080774.1",
                "section": "data",
                "name": "user21-bucket23:multi_master-anna.1827103.323:54",
                "timestamp": "2021-02-26 10:04:50.956965Z",
                "info": {
                    "source_zone": "multi_master-anna",
                    "error_code": 125,
                    "message": "failed to sync bucket instance: (125)
Operation canceled"
                }
            }
        ]
     }
]

I think this command should be used to determine its parameters, and
keep increasing, as long as -ECANCLE(125) does not appear, it is
appropriate.

WeiGuo Ren <rwg1335252904@xxxxxxxxx> 于2021年3月18日周四 下午7:37写道:
>
> I have an osd ceph cluster, rgw instance often appears to be renewed
> and not locked
>
> WeiGuo Ren <rwg1335252904@xxxxxxxxx> 于2021年3月18日周四 下午7:35写道:
> >
> > In an rgw multi-site production environment, how many rgw instances
> > will be started in a single zone? According to my test, multiple rgw
> > instances will compete for the datalog leaselock, and it is very
> > likely that the leaselock will not be renewed. Is the default
> > rgw_sync_lease_period=120s a bit small?




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

  Powered by Linux