Re: SSD Bluestore Backfills Slow

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

 

Hi Caspar,

David is correct, in that the issue I was having with SSD OSD’s having NVMe bluefs_db reporting as HDD creating an artificial throttle based on what David was mentioning, a prevention to keep spinning rust from thrashing. Not sure if the journal_rotational bit should be 1, but either way, it shouldn’t affect you being hdd OSDs. Curious how these OSD’s were deployed, per the below part of the message.

Copying Alfredo, as I’m not sure if something changed with respect to ceph-volume in 12.2.2 (when this originally happened) to 12.2.5 (I’m sure plenty did), because I recently had an NVMe drive fail on me unexpectedly (curse you Micron), and had to nuke and redo some SSD OSDs, and it was my first time deploying with ceph-deploy after the ceph-disk deprecation. The new OSD’s appear to report correctly wrt to the rotational status, where the others did not. So that appears to be working correctly, just wanted to provide some positive feedback there. Not sure if there’s an easy way to change those metadata tags on the OSDs, so that I don’t have to inject the args every time I need to reweight. Also feels like journal_rotational wouldn’t be a thing in bluestore?

ceph osd metadata |grep ‘id\|model\|type\|rotational’
        "id": 63,
        "bluefs_db_model": "MTFDHAX1T2MCF-1AN1ZABYY",
        "bluefs_db_rotational": "0",
        "bluefs_db_type": "nvme",
        "bluefs_slow_model": "",
        "bluefs_slow_rotational": "0",
        "bluefs_slow_type": "ssd",
        "bluestore_bdev_model": "",
        "bluestore_bdev_rotational": "0",
        "bluestore_bdev_type": "ssd",
        "journal_rotational": "1",
        "rotational": "0"
        "id": 64,
        "bluefs_db_model": "INTEL SSDPED1D960GAY                    ",
        "bluefs_db_rotational": "0",
        "bluefs_db_type": "nvme",
        "bluefs_slow_model": "",
        "bluefs_slow_rotational": "0",
        "bluefs_slow_type": "ssd",
        "bluestore_bdev_model": "",
        "bluestore_bdev_rotational": "0",
        "bluestore_bdev_type": "ssd",
        "journal_rotational": "0",
        "rotational": "0"

osd.63 being one deployed using ceph-volume lvm in 12.2.2 and osd.64 being redeployed using ceph-deploy in 12.2.5 using ceph-volume  backend.

Reed

On Jun 4, 2018, at 8:16 AM, David Turner <drakonstein@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I don't believe this really applies to you. The problem here was with an SSD osd that was incorrectly labeled as an HDD osd by ceph. The fix was to inject a sleep seeing if 0 for those osds to speed up recovery. The sleep is needed to not kill hdds to avoid thrashing, but the bug was SSDs were being incorrectly identified as HDD and SSDs don't have a problem with thrashing.

You can try increasing osd_max_backfills. Watch your disk utilization as you do this so that you don't accidentally kill your client io by setting that too high, assuming that still needs priority.

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018, 3:55 AM Caspar Smit <casparsmit@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Reed,

"Changing/injecting osd_recovery_sleep_hdd into the running SSD OSD’s on bluestore opened the floodgates."

What exactly did you change/inject here?

We have a cluster with 10TB SATA HDD's which each have a 100GB SSD based block.db

Looking at ceph osd metadata for each of those:

        "bluefs_db_model": "SAMSUNG MZ7KM960",
        "bluefs_db_rotational": "0",
        "bluefs_db_type": "ssd",
        "bluefs_slow_model": "ST10000NM0086-2A",
        "bluefs_slow_rotational": "1",
        "bluefs_slow_type": "hdd",
        "bluestore_bdev_rotational": "1",
        "bluestore_bdev_type": "hdd",
        "default_device_class": "hdd",
        "journal_rotational": "1",
        "osd_objectstore": "bluestore",
        "rotational": "1"

Looks to me if i'm hitting the same issue, isn't it?

ps. An upgrade of Ceph is planned in the near future but for now i would like to use the workaround if applicable to me.

Thank you in advance.

Kind regards,
Caspar Smit

2018-02-26 23:22 GMT+01:00 Reed Dier <reed.dier@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
Quick turn around,

Changing/injecting osd_recovery_sleep_hdd into the running SSD OSD’s on bluestore opened the floodgates.

pool objects-ssd id 20
  recovery io 1512 MB/s, 21547 objects/s

pool fs-metadata-ssd id 16
  recovery io 0 B/s, 6494 keys/s, 271 objects/s
  client io 82325 B/s rd, 68146 B/s wr, 1 op/s rd, 0 op/s wr

Graph of performance jump. Extremely marked.

So at least we now have the gun to go with the smoke.

Thanks for the help and appreciate you pointing me in some directions that I was able to use to figure out the issue.

Adding to ceph.conf for future OSD conversions.

Thanks,

Reed


On Feb 26, 2018, at 4:12 PM, Reed Dier <reed.dier@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

For the record, I am not seeing a demonstrative fix by injecting the value of 0 into the OSDs running.
osd_recovery_sleep_hybrid = '0.000000' (not observed, change may require restart)

If it does indeed need to be restarted, I will need to wait for the current backfills to finish their process as restarting an OSD would bring me under min_size.

However, doing config show on the osd daemon appears to have taken the value of 0.

ceph daemon osd.24 config show | grep recovery_sleep
    "osd_recovery_sleep": "0.000000",
    "osd_recovery_sleep_hdd": "0.100000",
    "osd_recovery_sleep_hybrid": "0.000000",
    "osd_recovery_sleep_ssd": "0.000000",

I may take the restart as an opportunity to also move to 12.2.3 at the same time, since it is not expected that that should affect this issue.

I could also attempt to change osd_recovery_sleep_hdd as well, since these are ssd osd’s, it shouldn’t make a difference, but its a free move.

Thanks,

Reed

On Feb 26, 2018, at 3:42 PM, Gregory Farnum <gfarnum@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 12:26 PM Reed Dier <reed.dier@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I will try to set the hybrid sleeps to 0 on the affected OSDs as an interim solution to getting the metadata configured correctly.

Yes, that's a good workaround as long as you don't have any actual hybrid OSDs (or aren't worried about them sleeping...I'm not sure if that setting came from experience or not).
 

For reference, here is the complete metadata for osd.24, bluestore SATA SSD with NVMe block.db.

{
        "id": 24,
        "arch": "x86_64",
        "back_addr": "",
        "back_iface": "bond0",
        "bluefs": "1",
        "bluefs_db_access_mode": "blk",
        "bluefs_db_block_size": "4096",
        "bluefs_db_dev": "259:0",
        "bluefs_db_dev_node": "nvme0n1",
        "bluefs_db_driver": "KernelDevice",
        "bluefs_db_model": "INTEL SSDPEDMD400G4                     ",
        "bluefs_db_partition_path": "/dev/nvme0n1p4",
        "bluefs_db_rotational": "0",
        "bluefs_db_serial": " ",
        "bluefs_db_size": "16000221184",
        "bluefs_db_type": "nvme",
        "bluefs_single_shared_device": "0",
        "bluefs_slow_access_mode": "blk",
        "bluefs_slow_block_size": "4096",
        "bluefs_slow_dev": "253:8",
        "bluefs_slow_dev_node": "dm-8",
        "bluefs_slow_driver": "KernelDevice",
        "bluefs_slow_model": "",
        "bluefs_slow_partition_path": "/dev/dm-8",
        "bluefs_slow_rotational": "0",
        "bluefs_slow_size": "1920378863616",
        "bluefs_slow_type": "ssd",
        "bluestore_bdev_access_mode": "blk",
        "bluestore_bdev_block_size": "4096",
        "bluestore_bdev_dev": "253:8",
        "bluestore_bdev_dev_node": "dm-8",
        "bluestore_bdev_driver": "KernelDevice",
        "bluestore_bdev_model": "",
        "bluestore_bdev_partition_path": "/dev/dm-8",
        "bluestore_bdev_rotational": "0",
        "bluestore_bdev_size": "1920378863616",
        "bluestore_bdev_type": "ssd",
        "ceph_version": "ceph version 12.2.2 (cf0baeeeeba3b47f9427c6c97e2144b094b7e5ba) luminous (stable)",
        "cpu": "Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz",
        "default_device_class": "ssd",
        "distro": "ubuntu",
        "distro_description": "Ubuntu 16.04.3 LTS",
        "distro_version": "16.04",
        "front_addr": "",
        "front_iface": "bond0",
        "hb_back_addr": "",
        "hb_front_addr": "",
        "hostname": “host00",
        "journal_rotational": "1",
        "kernel_description": "#29~16.04.2-Ubuntu SMP Tue Jan 9 22:00:44 UTC 2018",
        "kernel_version": "4.13.0-26-generic",
        "mem_swap_kb": "124999672",
        "mem_total_kb": "131914008",
        "os": "Linux",
        "osd_data": "/var/lib/ceph/osd/ceph-24",
        "osd_objectstore": "bluestore",
        "rotational": "0"
    }

So it looks like it correctly guessed(?) the bluestore_bdev_type/default_device_class correctly (though it may have been an inherited value?), as did bluefs_db_type get set to nvme correctly.

So I’m not sure why journal_rotational is still showing 1.
Maybe something in the ceph-volume lvm piece that isn’t correctly setting that flag on OSD creation?
Also seems like the journal_rotational field should have been deprecated in bluestore as bluefs_db_rotational should cover that, and if there were a WAL partition as well, I assume there would be something to the tune of bluefs_wal_rotational or something like that, and journal would never be used for bluestore?

Thanks to both of you for helping diagnose this issue. I created a ticket and have a PR up to fix it: http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/23141, https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/20602

Until that gets backported into another Luminous release you'll need to do some kind of workaround though. :/
-Greg
 

Appreciate the help.

Thanks,
Reed

On Feb 26, 2018, at 1:28 PM, Gregory Farnum <gfarnum@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 11:21 AM Reed Dier <reed.dier@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The ‘good perf’ that I reported below was the result of beginning 5 new bluestore conversions which results in a leading edge of ‘good’ performance, before trickling off.

This performance lasted about 20 minutes, where it backfilled a small set of PGs off of non-bluestore OSDs.

Current performance is now hovering around:
pool objects-ssd id 20
  recovery io 14285 kB/s, 202 objects/s

pool fs-metadata-ssd id 16
  recovery io 0 B/s, 262 keys/s, 12 objects/s
  client io 412 kB/s rd, 67593 B/s wr, 5 op/s rd, 0 op/s wr

What are you referencing when you talk about recovery ops per second?
These are recovery ops as reported by ceph -s or via stats exported via influx plugin in mgr, and via local collectd collection.

Also, what are the values for osd_recovery_sleep_hdd and osd_recovery_sleep_hybrid, and can you validate via "ceph osd metadata" that your BlueStore SSD OSDs are correctly reporting both themselves and their journals as non-rotational?

This yields more interesting results.
Pasting results for 3 sets of OSDs in this order
 {0}hdd+nvme block.db
{24}ssd+nvme block.db
{59}ssd+nvme journal

ceph osd metadata | grep 'id\|rotational'
"id": 0,
        "bluefs_db_rotational": "0",
        "bluefs_slow_rotational": "1",
        "bluestore_bdev_rotational": "1",
        "journal_rotational": "1",
        "rotational": “1"
"id": 24,
        "bluefs_db_rotational": "0",
        "bluefs_slow_rotational": "0",
        "bluestore_bdev_rotational": "0",
        "journal_rotational": "1",
        "rotational": “0"
"id": 59,
        "journal_rotational": "0",
        "rotational": “0"

I wonder if it matters/is correct to see "journal_rotational": “1” for the bluestore OSD’s {0,24} with nvme block.db.

Hope this may be helpful in determining the root cause.

If you have an SSD main store and a hard drive ("rotational") journal, the OSD will insert recovery sleeps from the osd_recovery_sleep_hybrid config option. By default that is .025 (seconds).

I believe you can override the setting (I'm not sure how), but you really want to correct that flag at the OS layer. Generally when we see this there's a RAID card or something between the solid-state device and the host which is lying about the state of the world.
-Greg
 

If it helps, all of the OSD’s were originally deployed with ceph-deploy, but are now being redone with ceph-volume locally on each host.

Thanks,

Reed

On Feb 26, 2018, at 1:00 PM, Gregory Farnum <gfarnum@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 9:12 AM Reed Dier <reed.dier@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
After my last round of backfills completed, I started 5 more bluestore conversions, which helped me recognize a very specific pattern of performance.

pool objects-ssd id 20
  recovery io 757 MB/s, 10845 objects/s

pool fs-metadata-ssd id 16
  recovery io 0 B/s, 36265 keys/s, 1633 objects/s
  client io 2544 kB/s rd, 36788 B/s wr, 1 op/s rd, 0 op/s wr

The “non-throttled” backfills are only coming from filestore SSD OSD’s.
When backfilling from bluestore SSD OSD’s, they appear to be throttled at the aforementioned <20 ops per OSD.

Wait, is that the current state? What are you referencing when you talk about recovery ops per second?

Also, what are the values for osd_recovery_sleep_hdd and osd_recovery_sleep_hybrid, and can you validate via "ceph osd metadata" that your BlueStore SSD OSDs are correctly reporting both themselves and their journals as non-rotational?
-Greg
 

This would corroborate why the first batch of SSD’s I migrated to bluestore were all at “full” speed, as all of the OSD’s they were backfilling from were filestore based, compared to increasingly bluestore backfill targets, leading to increasingly long backfill times as I move from one host to the next.

Looking at the recovery settings, the recovery_sleep and recovery_sleep_ssd values across bluestore or filestore OSDs are showing as 0 values, which means no sleep/throttle if I am reading everything correctly.

sudo ceph daemon osd.73 config show | grep recovery
    "osd_allow_recovery_below_min_size": "true",
    "osd_debug_skip_full_check_in_recovery": "false",
    "osd_force_recovery_pg_log_entries_factor": "1.300000",
    "osd_min_recovery_priority": "0",
    "osd_recovery_cost": "20971520",
    "osd_recovery_delay_start": "0.000000",
    "osd_recovery_forget_lost_objects": "false",
    "osd_recovery_max_active": "35",
    "osd_recovery_max_chunk": "8388608",
    "osd_recovery_max_omap_entries_per_chunk": "64000",
    "osd_recovery_max_single_start": "1",
    "osd_recovery_op_priority": "3",
    "osd_recovery_op_warn_multiple": "16",
    "osd_recovery_priority": "5",
    "osd_recovery_retry_interval": "30.000000",
    "osd_recovery_sleep": "0.000000",
    "osd_recovery_sleep_hdd": "0.100000",
    "osd_recovery_sleep_hybrid": "0.025000",
    "osd_recovery_sleep_ssd": "0.000000",
    "osd_recovery_thread_suicide_timeout": "300",
    "osd_recovery_thread_timeout": "30",
    "osd_scrub_during_recovery": "false",

As far as I know, the device class is configured correctly as far as I know, it all shows as ssd/hdd correctly in ceph osd tree.

So hopefully this may be enough of a smoking gun to help narrow down where this may be stemming from.

Thanks,

Reed

On Feb 23, 2018, at 10:04 AM, David Turner <drakonstein@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Here is a [1] link to a ML thread tracking some slow backfilling on bluestore.  It came down to the backfill sleep setting for them.  Maybe it will help.


On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 10:46 AM Reed Dier <reed.dier@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Probably unrelated, but I do keep seeing this odd negative objects degraded message on the fs-metadata pool:

pool fs-metadata-ssd id 16
  -34/3 objects degraded (-1133.333%)
  recovery io 0 B/s, 89 keys/s, 2 objects/s
  client io 51289 B/s rd, 101 kB/s wr, 0 op/s rd, 0 op/s wr

Don’t mean to clutter the ML/thread, however it did seem odd, maybe its a culprit? Maybe its some weird sampling interval issue thats been solved in 12.2.3?

Thanks,

Reed


On Feb 23, 2018, at 8:26 AM, Reed Dier <reed.dier@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Below is ceph -s

  cluster:
    id:     {id}
    health: HEALTH_WARN
            noout flag(s) set
            260610/1068004947 objects misplaced (0.024%)
            Degraded data redundancy: 23157232/1068004947 objects degraded (2.168%), 332 pgs unclean, 328 pgs degraded, 328 pgs undersized

  services:
    mon: 3 daemons, quorum mon02,mon01,mon03
    mgr: mon03(active), standbys: mon02
    mds: cephfs-1/1/1 up  {0=mon03=up:active}, 1 up:standby
    osd: 74 osds: 74 up, 74 in; 332 remapped pgs
         flags noout

  data:
    pools:   5 pools, 5316 pgs
    objects: 339M objects, 46627 GB
    usage:   154 TB used, 108 TB / 262 TB avail
    pgs:     23157232/1068004947 objects degraded (2.168%)
             260610/1068004947 objects misplaced (0.024%)
             4984 active+clean
             183  active+undersized+degraded+remapped+backfilling
             145  active+undersized+degraded+remapped+backfill_wait
             3    active+remapped+backfill_wait
             1    active+remapped+backfilling

  io:
    client:   8428 kB/s rd, 47905 B/s wr, 130 op/s rd, 0 op/s wr
    recovery: 37057 kB/s, 50 keys/s, 217 objects/s

Also the two pools on the SSDs, are the objects pool at 4096 PG, and the fs-metadata pool at 32 PG.

Are you sure the recovery is actually going slower, or are the individual ops larger or more expensive?
The objects should not vary wildly in size.
Even if they were differing in size, the SSDs are roughly idle in their current state of backfilling when examining wait in iotop, or atop, or sysstat/iostat.

This compares to when I was fully saturating the SATA backplane with over 1000MB/s of writes to multiple disks when the backfills were going “full speed.”

Here is a breakdown of recovery io by pool:

pool objects-ssd id 20
  recovery io 6779 kB/s, 92 objects/s
  client io 3071 kB/s rd, 50 op/s rd, 0 op/s wr

pool fs-metadata-ssd id 16
  recovery io 0 B/s, 28 keys/s, 2 objects/s
  client io 109 kB/s rd, 67455 B/s wr, 1 op/s rd, 0 op/s wr

pool cephfs-hdd id 17
  recovery io 40542 kB/s, 158 objects/s
  client io 10056 kB/s rd, 142 op/s rd, 0 op/s wr

So the 24 HDD’s are outperforming the 50 SSD’s for recovery and client traffic at the moment, which seems conspicuous to me.

Most of the OSD’s with recovery ops to the SSDs are reporting 8-12 ops, with one OSD occasionally spiking up to 300-500 for a few minutes. Stats being pulled by both local CollectD instances on each node, as well as the Influx plugin in MGR as we evaluate that against collectd.

Thanks,

Reed


On Feb 22, 2018, at 6:21 PM, Gregory Farnum <gfarnum@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

What's the output of "ceph -s" while this is happening?

Is there some identifiable difference between these two states, like you get a lot of throughput on the data pools but then metadata recovery is slower?

Are you sure the recovery is actually going slower, or are the individual ops larger or more expensive?

My WAG is that recovering the metadata pool, composed mostly of directories stored in omap objects, is going much slower for some reason. You can adjust the cost of those individual ops some by changing osd_recovery_max_omap_entries_per_chunk (default: 8096), but I'm not sure which way you want to go or indeed if this has anything to do with the problem you're seeing. (eg, it could be that reading out the omaps is expensive, so you can get higher recovery op numbers by turning down the number of entries per request, but not actually see faster backfilling because you have to issue more requests.)
-Greg

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 2:57 PM Reed Dier <reed.dier@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi all,

I am running into an odd situation that I cannot easily explain.
I am currently in the midst of destroy and rebuild of OSDs from filestore to bluestore.
With my HDDs, I am seeing expected behavior, but with my SSDs I am seeing unexpected behavior. The HDDs and SSDs are set in crush accordingly.

My path to replacing the OSDs is to set the noout, norecover, norebalance flag, destroy the OSD, create the OSD back, (iterate n times, all within a single failure domain), unset the flags, and let it go. It finishes, rinse, repeat.

For the SSD OSDs, they are SATA SSDs (Samsung SM863a) , 10 to a node, with 2 NVMe drives (Intel P3700), 5 SATA SSDs to 1 NVMe drive, 16G partitions for block.db (previously filestore journals).
2x10GbE networking between the nodes. SATA backplane caps out at around 10 Gb/s as its 2x 6 Gb/s controllers. Luminous 12.2.2.

When the flags are unset, recovery starts and I see a very large rush of traffic, however, after the first machine completed, the performance tapered off at a rapid pace and trickles. Comparatively, I’m getting 100-200 recovery ops on 3 HDDs, backfilling from 21 other HDDs, where as I’m getting 150-250 recovery ops on 5 SSDs, backfilling from 40 other SSDs. Every once in a while I will see a spike up to 500, 1000, or even 2000 ops on the SSDs, often a few hundred recovery ops from one OSD, and 8-15 ops from the others that are backfilling.

This is a far cry from the more than 15-30k recovery ops that it started off recovering with 1-3k recovery ops from a single OSD to the backfilling OSD(s). And an even farther cry from the >15k recovery ops I was sustaining for over an hour or more before. I was able to rebuild a 1.9T SSD (1.1T used) in a little under an hour, and I could do about 5 at a time and still keep it at roughly an hour to backfill all of them, but then I hit a roadblock after the first machine, when I tried to do 10 at a time (single machine). I am now still experiencing the same thing on the third node, while doing 5 OSDs at a time. 

The pools associated with these SSDs are cephfs-metadata, as well as a pure rados object pool we use for our own internal applications. Both are size=3, min_size=2.

It appears I am not the first to run into this, but it looks like there was no resolution: https://www.spinics.net/lists/ceph-users/msg41493.html

Recovery parameters for the OSDs match what was in the previous thread, sans the osd conf block listed. And current osd_max_backfills = 30 and osd_recovery_max_active = 35. Very little activity on the OSDs during this period, so should not be any contention for iops on the SSDs.

The only oddity that I can attribute to things is that we had a few periods of time where the disk load on one of the mons was high enough to cause the mon to drop out of quorum for a brief amount of time, a few times. But I wouldn’t think backfills would just get throttled due to mons flapping.

Hopefully someone has some experience or can steer me in a path to improve the performance of the backfills so that I’m not stuck in backfill purgatory longer than I need to be.

Linking an imgur album with some screen grabs of the recovery ops over time for the first machine, versus the second and third machines to demonstrate the delta between them.

Also including a ceph osd df of the SSDs, highlighted in red are the OSDs currently backfilling. Could this possibly be PG overdose? I don’t ever run into ‘stuck activating’ PGs, its just painfully slow backfills, like they are being throttled by ceph, that are causing me to worry. Drives aren’t worn, <30 P/E cycles on the drives, so plenty of life left in them.

Thanks,
Reed

$ ceph osd df
ID CLASS WEIGHT  REWEIGHT SIZE  USE   AVAIL %USE  VAR  PGS
24   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1094G  708G 60.69 1.08 260
25   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1136G  667G 63.01 1.12 271
26   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1018G  785G 56.46 1.01 243
27   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1065G  737G 59.10 1.05 253
28   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1026G  776G 56.94 1.02 245
29   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1132G  671G 62.79 1.12 270
30   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G  944G  859G 52.35 0.93 224
31   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1061G  742G 58.85 1.05 252
32   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1003G  799G 55.67 0.99 239
33   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1049G  753G 58.20 1.04 250
34   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1086G  717G 60.23 1.07 257
35   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G  978G  824G 54.26 0.97 232
36   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1057G  745G 58.64 1.05 252
37   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1025G  777G 56.88 1.01 244
38   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1047G  756G 58.06 1.04 250
39   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1031G  771G 57.20 1.02 246
40   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1029G  774G 57.07 1.02 245
41   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1033G  770G 57.28 1.02 245
42   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G  993G  809G 55.10 0.98 236
43   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1072G  731G 59.45 1.06 256
44   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1039G  763G 57.64 1.03 248
45   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G  992G  810G 55.06 0.98 236
46   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1068G  735G 59.23 1.06 254
47   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G 1020G  783G 56.57 1.01 242
48   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G  945G  857G 52.44 0.94 225
49   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G  649G 1154G 36.01 0.64 139
50   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G  426G 1377G 23.64 0.42  83
51   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G  610G 1193G 33.84 0.60 131
52   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G  558G 1244G 30.98 0.55 118
53   ssd 1.76109  1.00000 1803G  731G 1072G 40.54 0.72 161
54   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  859G  928G 48.06 0.86 229
55   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  942G  844G 52.74 0.94 252
56   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  928G  859G 51.94 0.93 246
57   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G 1039G  748G 58.15 1.04 277
58   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  963G  824G 53.87 0.96 255
59   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  909G  877G 50.89 0.91 241
60   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G 1039G  748G 58.15 1.04 277
61   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  892G  895G 49.91 0.89 238
62   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  927G  859G 51.90 0.93 245
63   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  864G  922G 48.39 0.86 229
64   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  968G  819G 54.16 0.97 257
65   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  892G  894G 49.93 0.89 237
66   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  951G  836G 53.23 0.95 252
67   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  878G  908G 49.16 0.88 232
68   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  899G  888G 50.29 0.90 238
69   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  948G  839G 53.04 0.95 252
70   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  914G  873G 51.15 0.91 246
71   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G 1004G  782G 56.21 1.00 266
72   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  812G  974G 45.47 0.81 216
73   ssd 1.74599  1.00000 1787G  932G  855G 52.15 0.93 247
_______________________________________________
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

_______________________________________________
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


_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
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