On Mon, 4 Aug 2014, Konstantinos Tompoulidis wrote: > Hi all, > > We recently added many OSDs to our production cluster. > This brought us to a point where the number of PGs we had assigned to our > main (heavily used) pool was well below the recommended value. > > We increased the PG number (incrementally to avoid huge degradation ratios) > to the recommended optimal value. > > Once the procedure ended we noticed that the output of "ceph df" ( POOLS: ) > does not represent the actual state. How did it mismatch reality? > Has anyone noticed this before and if so is there a fix? There is some ambiguity in the stats after PG split that gets cleaned up on the next scrub. I wouldn't expect it to be noticeable, though ... sage
 |