On Mon, 22 Apr 2013, Andrey Korolyov wrote: > On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 7:10 PM, Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > What version of Ceph are you running? > > > > sage > > 0.56.4 with couple of backports from bobtail, but I`m not sure if > version matters - the same behaviour was around from early 0.5x > releases. I ask because the snapshot trimming was completely rewritten in 0.58 or 0.59. Is possible to test the latest on this cluster, or is it in production? sage > > > > > On Mon, 22 Apr 2013, Andrey Korolyov wrote: > > > >> I had observed that the slow requests up to 10-20 seconds on writes > >> may be produced immediately after creation or deletion of a snapshot > >> of relatively large image, despite that image may be entirely unused > >> at the moment. > >> > >> On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Gregory Farnum <greg@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > Which version of Ceph are you running right now and seeing this with > >> > (Sam reworked it a bit for Cuttlefish and it was in some of the dev > >> > releases)? Snapshot deletes are a little more expensive than we'd > >> > like, but I'm surprised they're doing this badly for you. :/ > >> > -Greg > >> > Software Engineer #42 @ http://inktank.com | http://ceph.com > >> > > >> > On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 2:16 AM, Olivier Bonvalet > >> > <olivier.bonvalet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> Hi, > >> >> > >> >> I have a backup script, which every night : > >> >> * create a snapshot of each RBD image > >> >> * then delete all snapshot that have more than 15 days > >> >> > >> >> The problem is that "rbd snap rm XXX" will overload my cluster for hours > >> >> (6 hours today...). > >> >> > >> >> Here I see several problems : > >> >> #1 "rbd snap rm XXX" is not blocking. The erase is done in background, > >> >> and I know no way to verify if it was completed. So I add "sleeps" > >> >> between rm, but I have to estimate the time it will take > >> >> > >> >> #2 "rbd (snap) rm" are sometimes very very slow. I don't know if it's > >> >> because of XFS or not, but all my OSD are at 100% IO usage (reported by > >> >> iostat) > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> So : > >> >> * is there a way to reduce priority of "snap rm", to avoid overloading > >> >> of the cluster ? > >> >> * is there a way to have a blocking "snap rm" which will wait until it's > >> >> completed > >> >> * is there a way to speedup "snap rm" ? > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Note that I have a too low PG number on my cluster (200 PG for 40 active > >> >> OSD ; but I'm trying to progressivly migrate data to a newer pool). Can > >> >> it be the source of the problem ? > >> >> > >> >> Thanks, > >> >> > >> >> Olivier > >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> ceph-users mailing list > >> >> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > ceph-users mailing list > >> > ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > >> _______________________________________________ > >> ceph-users mailing list > >> ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |