Re: OSDs with primary affinity 0 still used for primary PG

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

 



Hi David,

Thanks for explaining that, makes sense. (Though I guess the docs aren't very clear on that, but ok.) I have a follow up question on your suggestion to modify the crush map though.

I've seen a few examples on how to use crush rules to place primary copies on SSDs, and secondary copies on HDDs. In fact, one such example is in the main Ceph docs. However, they all seem to be based on the premise of having two types of OSD servers. One type would have *only* SSDs, and the other *only* HDDs.

However, that's not the scenario I'm investigating. I would like each of my OSD servers to be the same. Each would contain a number of SSDs, and a number of HDDs.

After reading up on crush rules, I think I understand how to setup a basic rule that would place the primary copy on a SSD, and the other copies on HDDs. But what I haven't figured out yet, is it possible to avoid placing one of the secondary copies on the same host that stores the primary copy?

I found an earlier thread [1] where you've hinted at using racks for this, but in that thread I think there is also some confusion about SSD/HDD only servers, versus "hybrid" servers. In addition, I found an issue in RedHats tracker [2], which also outlines this problem.

With my current understanding of crush rules, I'm not sure the setup I had in mind is feasible?

Thanks,
Teun

[1] http://lists.ceph.com/pipermail/ceph-users-ceph.com/2017-April/017589.html
[2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1517128

On 02/12/2018 09:17 PM, David Turner wrote:
> If you look at the PGs that are primary on an OSD that has primary 
> affinity 0, you'll find that they are only on OSDs with primary affinity 
> of 0, so 1 of them has to take the reins or nobody would be responsible 
> for the PG.  To prevent this from happening, you would need to configure 
> your crush map in a way where all PGs are guaranteed to land on at least 
> 1 OSD that doesn't have a primary affinity of 0.
> 
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 2:45 PM Teun Docter 
> <teun.docter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> <mailto:teun.docter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> 
>     Hi,
> 
>     I'm looking into storing the primary copy on SSDs, and replicas on
>     spinners.
>     One way to achieve this should be the primary affinity setting, as
>     outlined in this post:
> 
>     https://www.sebastien-han.fr/blog/2015/08/06/ceph-get-the-best-of-your-ssd-with-primary-affinity
> 
>     So I've deployed a small test cluster and set the affinity to 0 for
>     half the OSDs and to 1 for the rest:
> 
>     # ceph osd tree
>     ID CLASS WEIGHT  TYPE NAME       STATUS REWEIGHT PRI-AFF
>     -1       0.07751 root default
>     -3       0.01938     host osd001
>       1   hdd 0.00969         osd.1       up  1.00000 1.00000
>       4   hdd 0.00969         osd.4       up  1.00000       0
>     -7       0.01938     host osd002
>       2   hdd 0.00969         osd.2       up  1.00000 1.00000
>       6   hdd 0.00969         osd.6       up  1.00000       0
>     -9       0.01938     host osd003
>       3   hdd 0.00969         osd.3       up  1.00000 1.00000
>       7   hdd 0.00969         osd.7       up  1.00000       0
>     -5       0.01938     host osd004
>       0   hdd 0.00969         osd.0       up  1.00000 1.00000
>       5   hdd 0.00969         osd.5       up  1.00000       0
> 
>     Then I've created a pool. The summary at the end of "ceph pg dump"
>     looks like this:
> 
>     sum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
>     OSD_STAT USED  AVAIL  TOTAL  HB_PEERS        PG_SUM PRIMARY_PG_SUM
>     7        1071M  9067M 10138M [0,1,2,3,4,5,6]    192             26
>     6        1072M  9066M 10138M [0,1,2,3,4,5,7]    198             18
>     5        1071M  9067M 10138M [0,1,2,3,4,6,7]    192             21
>     4        1076M  9062M 10138M [0,1,2,3,5,6,7]    202             15
>     3        1072M  9066M 10138M [0,1,2,4,5,6,7]    202            121
>     2        1072M  9066M 10138M [0,1,3,4,5,6,7]    195            114
>     1        1076M  9062M 10138M [0,2,3,4,5,6,7]    161             95
>     0        1071M  9067M 10138M [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]    194            102
>     sum      8587M 72524M 81111M
> 
>     Now, the OSDs for which the primary affinity is set to zero are
>     acting as primary a lot less than the others.
> 
>     But what I'm wondering about is this:
> 
>     For those OSDs that have primary affinity set to zero, why is the
>     PRIMARY_PG_SUM column not zero?
> 
>     # ceph -v
>     ceph version 12.2.2 (cf0baeeeeba3b47f9427c6c97e2144b094b7e5ba)
>     luminous (stable)
> 
>     Note that I've created the pool after setting the primary affinity,
>     and no data is stored yet.
> 
>     Thanks,
>     Teun
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     ceph-users mailing list
>     ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto: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