On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 6:55 AM, Kent Borg <kentborg@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 02/23/2017 07:43 AM, Kent Borg wrote: >> >> I ran a long list_objects() overnight and, at first glance this morning, >> the output looks good, but it is thousands of objects fewer than get_stats() >> said are there. > > > Update: I scripted up a quick check and every object name I would expect to > be in my pool is in the list_objects() output, no extra names are there, and > the reported sizes are all reasonable. > > Yet get_stats() says there are thousands additional objects in that pool. > > It took some time to put all those objects in the pool, and for most of that > time get_stats() did report the number I expected. But then, it differed... > > Is my cluster corrupted, is get_stats() sometimes (!) just a +/- 1%-ish > estimate, or is my logic and use of Ceph wrong? Did you run a pg split or something? That's the only off-hand way I can think of the number of objects going over, though I don't recall how snapshots impact those numbers and obviously it's very wonky if you were to use a cache tier. -Greg _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |