On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 2:17 PM, Gregory Farnum <gfarnum@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 9:21 AM Max Cuttins <max@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> I think this is a good question for everybody: How hard should be delete a >> Pool? >> >> We ask to tell the pool twice. >> We ask to add "--yes-i-really-really-mean-it" >> We ask to add ability to mons to delete the pool (and remove this ability >> ASAP after). >> >> ... and then somebody of course ask us to restore the pool. >> >> I think that all this stuff is not looking in the right direction. >> It's not the administrator that need to be warned from delete datas. >> It's the data owner that should be warned (which most of the time give >> it's approval by phone and gone). >> >> >> So, all this stuff just make the life of administrator harder, while not >> improving in any way the life of the Data Owner. >> Probably the best solution is to ...do not delete at all and instead apply >> a "deleting policy". >> Something like: >> >> ceph osd pool rm POOL_NAME -yes >> -> POOL_NAME is set to be deleted, removal is scheduled within 30 days. >> >> >> This allow us to do 2 things: >> >> allow administrator to don't waste their time in CML with true strange >> command >> allow data owner to have a grace period to verify if, after deletion, >> everything works as expected and that data that disapper wasn't usefull in >> some way. >> >> After 30 days data will be removed automatically. This is a safe policy >> for ADMIN and DATA OWNER. >> Of course ADMIN should be allowed to remove POOL scheduleded for deletion >> in order to save disk spaces if needed (but only if needed). >> >> What do you think? >> >> > > You're not wrong, and indeed that's why I pushed back on the latest attempt > to make deleting pools even more cumbersome. > > But having a "trash" concept is also pretty weird. If admins can override it > to just immediately delete the data (if they need the space), how is that > different from just being another hoop to jump through? If we want to give > the data owners a chance to undo, how do we identify and notify *them* > rather than the admin running the command? But if admins can't override the > trash and delete immediately, what do we do for things like testing and > proofs of concept where large-scale data creates and deletes are to be > expected? What about using the at command: ceph osd pool rm <pool> <pool> --yes-i-really-really-mean-it | at now + 30 days Regards, Alex > -Greg > > _______________________________________________ > 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
 |