Re: Safe to delete data, metadata pools?

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

 



On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 2:55 AM, Richard Bade <hitrich@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
> I've got a couple of pools that I don't believe are being used but
> have a reasonably large number of pg's (approx 50% of our total pg's).
> I'd like to delete them but as they were pre-existing when I inherited
> the cluster, I wanted to make sure they aren't needed for anything
> first.
> Here's the details:
> POOLS:
>     NAME                   ID     USED       %USED     MAX AVAIL     OBJECTS
>     data                   0           0         0        88037G            0
>     metadata               1           0         0        88037G            0
>
> We don't run cephfs and I believe these are meant for that, but may
> have been created by default when the cluster was set up (back on
> dumpling or bobtail I think).
> As far as I can tell there is no data in them. Do they need to exist
> for some ceph function?
> The pool names worry me a little, as they sound important.

The data and metadata pools were indeed created by default in older
versions of Ceph, for use by CephFS.  Since you're not using CephFS,
and nobody is using the pools for anything else either (they're
empty), you can go ahead and delete them.

>
> They have 3136 pg's each so I'd like to be rid of those so I can
> increase the number of pg's in my actual data pools without getting
> over the 300 pg's per osd.
> Here's the osd dump:
> pool 0 'data' replicated size 2 min_size 1 crush_ruleset 0 object_hash
> rjenkins pg_num 3136 pgp_num 3136 last_change 1 crash_replay_interval
> 45 min_read_recency_for_promote 1 min_write_recency_for_promote 1
> stripe_width 0
> pool 1 'metadata' replicated size 2 min_size 1 crush_ruleset 1
> object_hash rjenkins pg_num 3136 pgp_num 3136 last_change 1
> min_read_recency_for_promote 1 min_write_recency_for_promote 1
> stripe_width 0
>
> Also, what performance impact am I likely to see when ceph removes the
> empty pg's considering it's approx 50% of my total pg's on my 180
> osd's.

Given that they're empty, I'd expect little if any noticeable impact.

John

>
> Thanks,
> Rich
> _______________________________________________
> 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