Re: Cache Tiering Question

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

 






> -----Original Message-----
> From: ceph-users [mailto:ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Robert LeBlanc
> Sent: 15 October 2015 22:06
> To: ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject:  Cache Tiering Question
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
> 
> ceph df (ceph version 0.94.3-252-g629b631
> (629b631488f044150422371ac77dfc005f3de1bc)) is showing some odd
> results:
> 
> root@nodez:~# ceph df
> GLOBAL:
>     SIZE       AVAIL      RAW USED     %RAW USED
>     24518G     21670G        1602G          6.53
> POOLS:
>     NAME         ID     USED      %USED     MAX AVAIL     OBJECTS
>     rbd          0      2723G     11.11         6380G     1115793
>     ssd-pool     2          0         0          732G           1
> 
> The rbd pool is showing 11.11% used, but if you calculate the numbers
there
> it is 2723/6380=42.68%.

I have a feeling that the percentage is based on the amount used of the
total cluster size. Ie 2723/24518

> 
> Will this cause problems with the relative cache tier settings? Do I need
to set
> the percentage based on what Ceph is reporting here?

The flushing/eviction thresholds are based on the target_max_bytes number
that you set, they have nothing to do with the underlying pool size. It's up
to you to come up with a sane number for this variable.

> 
> Thanks,
> - ----------------
> Robert LeBlanc
> PGP Fingerprint 79A2 9CA4 6CC4 45DD A904  C70E E654 3BB2 FA62 B9F1 -----
> BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: Mailvelope v1.2.0
> Comment: https://www.mailvelope.com
> 
> wsFcBAEBCAAQBQJWIBVGCRDmVDuy+mK58QAAXEYQAKm5IBGn81Hlb9az4
> 52x
> hSH6onk7mJE7L2s5FnoJv2sNW4azhDEVKGQBE9vvhIVBhhtKtnqdzu3ytk6E
> EUFuPBzUWLJyG3wQtp3QC0PdYzlGkS7bowdpZqk9PdaYZYgEdqG/cLEl/eAx
> LGIUXmr6vIuNhnntGIIYeUAiWXA7b5qzOKbef6OlOp7Mz6Euel9S8ycZlSAR
> eBQ5hdLSFoFai5ldyV+/hmqLnujOfanRFC8pIYr41aKe7wBOPOargLGQdka3
> jswmcf+0hV7QqZSOjJijDYvOgRuHBFK6cdyP9SRKxWxG7uH+yDOvya0TqOob
> 1yDomYC1zD2uzG9+L5Iv6at8fuBF5xFKPqax9N4WQj3Oj9fBwioQVBocNxHc
> MIlQnvnLeq6OLtdfPoPignTAHIH2RrvAmdwYkSCuopjUSTkmBsyBLIiiz/KI
> P4mSXAxZb0UF4pbCDgdYG6qUEywR/enGsT1lnmNLx4vY8W/yz9xQ3o3JnIpD
> pWyo9zJ8Ugnwvihbo7xKe+EZOeJL0YF4BiyAprH5pKFdQcAWcV98zWHnLBxd
> EFHyN9fHsVdw0UsxIUBZFfM1u4S7fchgVeFfiTSdGqd/dWHQCHKJPNBSJnae
> aPKTyvg77N6zTn04VGspfenR+svGbkAtUfO2HJ1Kkd4/wZ9GIzsS1ovPZFsM
> jJe4
> =YSyj
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> 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



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


  Powered by Linux