Re: Reweight OSD to 0, why doesn't report degraded if UP set under Pool Size

[Paul Emmerich <paul.emmerich@xxxxxxxx>]

remapped no longer triggers a health warning in nautilus.

Your data is still there, it's just on the wrong OSD if that OSD is still up and running.

Paul

--
Paul Emmerich

Looking for help with your Ceph cluster? Contact us at https://croit.io

croit GmbH
Freseniusstr. 31h
81247 München
www.croit.io
Tel: +49 89 1896585 90

On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 10:48 PM Tarek Zegar <tzegar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

For testing purposes I set a bunch of OSD to 0 weight, this correctly forces Ceph to not use said OSD. I took enough out such that the UP set only had Pool min size # of OSD (i.e 2 OSD).

Two Questions:
1. Why doesn't the acting set eventually match the UP set and simply point to [6,5] only
2. Why are none of the PGs marked as undersized and degraded? The data is only hosted on 2 OSD rather then Pool size (3), I would expect a undersized warning and degraded for PG with data?

Example PG:
PG 1.4d active+clean+remapped UP= [6,5] Acting = [6,5,4]

OSD Tree:
ID CLASS WEIGHT TYPE NAME STATUS REWEIGHT PRI-AFF
-1 0.08817 root default
-3 0.02939 host hostosd1
0 hdd 0.00980 osd.0 up 1.00000 1.00000
3 hdd 0.00980 osd.3 up 1.00000 1.00000
6 hdd 0.00980 osd.6 up 1.00000 1.00000
-5 0.02939 host hostosd2
1 hdd 0.00980 osd.1 up 0 1.00000
4 hdd 0.00980 osd.4 up 0 1.00000
7 hdd 0.00980 osd.7 up 0 1.00000
-7 0.02939 host hostosd3
2 hdd 0.00980 osd.2 up 1.00000 1.00000
5 hdd 0.00980 osd.5 up 1.00000 1.00000
8 hdd 0.00980 osd.8 up 0 1.00000

_______________________________________________
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