HI Chris,
That's an interesting point, I bet the managed switches don't have jumbo frames enabled.
I think I am going to leave everything at our colo for now.
Cheers,
Mike
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 2:42 PM, Chris Taylor <ctaylor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I see on this list often that peering issues are related to networking and MTU sizes. Perhaps the HP 5400's or the managed switches did not have jumbo frames enabled?
Hope that helps you determine the issue in case you want to move the nodes back to the other location.
Chris
On 2016-10-11 2:30 pm, Mike Jacobacci wrote:
Hi Goncalo,Thanks for your reply! I finally figured out that our issue was with the physical setup of the nodes. Se had one OSD and MON node in our office and the others are co-located at our ISP. We have an almost dark fiber going between our two buildings connected via HP 5400's, but it really isn't since there are some switches in between doing VLAN rewriting (ISP managed).Even though all the interfaces were communicating without issue, no data would move across the nodes. I ended up moving all nodes into the same rack and data immediately started moving and the cluster is now working! So it seems the storage traffic was being dropped/blocked by something on our ISP side.Cheers,Mike
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Goncalo Borges <goncalo.borges@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Mike...
I was hoping that someone with a bit more experience would answer you since I never had similar situation. So, I'll try to step in and help.
The peering process means that the OSDs are agreeing on the state of objects in the PGs they share. The peering process can take some time and is a hard operation to execute from a ceph point of view, specially if a lot of peering happens at the same time. This is one of the reasons why also the pg increase should be done in very small steps (normally increases of 256 pgs).
Is your cluster slowly decreasing the number of pgs in peering? and the number of active pgs increasing? If you see no evolution at all after this time, you can have a problem.
pgs which do not leave the peering state may be because:
- incorrect crush map
- issues in osds
- issues with the network
Check that your network is working as expected and that you do not have firewalls blocking traffic and so on.
A pg query for one of those peering pgs may provide some further information about what could be wrong.
Looking to osd logs may also show a bit of light.
Cheers
Goncalo
________________________________________
From: ceph-users [ceph-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx.com ] on behalf of Mike Jacobacci [mikej@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 10 October 2016 01:55
To: ceph-users@xxxxxxxx
Subject: New OSD Nodes, pgs haven't changed state
Hi,
Yesterday morning I added two more OSD nodes and changed the crushmap from disk to node. It looked to me like everything went ok besides some disks missing that I can re-add later, but the cluster status hasn't changed since then. Here is the output of ceph -w:
cluster 395fb046-0062-4252-914c-013258c5575c monmap e2: 3 mons at {birkeland=192.168.10.190:6789
health HEALTH_ERR
1761 pgs are stuck inactive for more than 300 seconds
1761 pgs peering
1761 pgs stuck inactive
8 requests are blocked > 32 sec
crush map has legacy tunables (require bobtail, min is firefly)/0,immanuel=192.168.10.1 <http://192.168.10.190:6789/0,immanu > 25:6789/0,peratt=192.168.10.1el=192.168.10.1 87:6789/0 <http://192.168.10.187:6789/0 >}
election epoch 14, quorum 0,1,2 immanuel,peratt,birkeland
osdmap e186: 26 osds: 26 up, 26 in; 1796 remapped pgs
flags sortbitwise
pgmap v6599413: 1796 pgs, 4 pools, 1343 GB data, 336 kobjects
4049 GB used, 92779 GB / 96829 GB avail
1761 remapped+peering
35 active+clean
2016-10-09 07:00:00.000776 mon.0 [INF] HEALTH_ERR; 1761 pgs are stuck inactive f or more than 300 seconds; 1761 pgs peering; 1761 pgs stuck inactive; 8 requests are blocked > 32 sec; crush map has legacy tunables (require bobtail, min is fir efly)
I have legacy tunables on since Ceph is only backing our Xenserver infrastructure. The number of pgs remapping and clean haven't changed and there isn't seem to be that much data... Is this normal behavior?
Here is my crushmap:
# begin crush map
tunable choose_local_tries 0
tunable choose_local_fallback_tries 0
tunable choose_total_tries 50
tunable chooseleaf_descend_once 1
tunable straw_calc_version 1
# devices
device 0 osd.0
device 1 osd.1
device 2 osd.2
device 3 osd.3
device 4 osd.4
device 5 osd.5
device 6 osd.6
device 7 osd.7
device 8 osd.8
device 9 osd.9
device 10 osd.10
device 11 osd.11
device 12 osd.12
device 13 osd.13
device 14 osd.14
device 15 osd.15
device 16 osd.16
device 17 osd.17
device 18 osd.18
device 19 osd.19
device 20 osd.20
device 21 osd.21
device 22 osd.22
device 23 osd.23
device 24 osd.24
device 25 osd.25
# types
type 0 osd
type 1 host
type 2 chassis
type 3 rack
type 4 row
type 5 pdu
type 6 pod
type 7 room
type 8 datacenter
type 9 region
type 10 root
# buckets
host tesla {
id -2 # do not change unnecessarily
# weight 36.369
alg straw
hash 0 # rjenkins1
item osd.5 weight 3.637
item osd.0 weight 3.637
item osd.2 weight 3.637
item osd.4 weight 3.637
item osd.8 weight 3.637
item osd.3 weight 3.637
item osd.6 weight 3.637
item osd.1 weight 3.637
item osd.9 weight 3.637
item osd.7 weight 3.637
}
host faraday {
id -3 # do not change unnecessarily
# weight 32.732
alg straw
hash 0 # rjenkins1
item osd.23 weight 3.637
item osd.18 weight 3.637
item osd.17 weight 3.637
item osd.25 weight 3.637
item osd.20 weight 3.637
item osd.22 weight 3.637
item osd.21 weight 3.637
item osd.19 weight 3.637
item osd.24 weight 3.637
}
host hertz {
id -4 # do not change unnecessarily
# weight 25.458
alg straw
hash 0 # rjenkins1
item osd.15 weight 3.637
item osd.12 weight 3.637
item osd.13 weight 3.637
item osd.14 weight 3.637
item osd.16 weight 3.637
item osd.10 weight 3.637
item osd.11 weight 3.637
}
root default {
id -1 # do not change unnecessarily
# weight 94.559
alg straw
hash 0 # rjenkins1
item tesla weight 36.369
item faraday weight 32.732
item hertz weight 25.458
}
# rules
rule replicated_ruleset {
ruleset 0
type replicated
min_size 1
max_size 10
step take default
step chooseleaf firstn 0 type host
step emit
}
# end crush map
Cheers,
Mike
_______________________________________________
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