Update: I have been pointed to this <https://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/rados/operations/upmap/> doku "Using the pg-upmap" and I checked the offline optimization. However the output for the relevant pool shows: no upmaps proposed root@ld3955:/mnt/rbd# osdmaptool om --upmap out.txt --upmap-pool hdb_backup osdmaptool: osdmap file 'om' writing upmap command output to: out.txt checking for upmap cleanups upmap, max-count 100, max deviation 0.01 limiting to pools hdb_backup (11) no upmaps proposed This is very strange because it is clear that this pool hdb_backup is very much unbalanced. Please advise. THX .......................................... Hi, the output of ceph health details gives me a warning that concerns me a little. I'll explain in a second. root@ld3955:/mnt/rbd# ceph health detail HEALTH_WARN 1 nearfull osd(s); 1 pool(s) nearfull; 4 pools have too many placement groups OSD_NEARFULL 1 nearfull osd(s) osd.122 is near full POOL_NEARFULL 1 pool(s) nearfull pool 'hdb_backup' is nearfull POOL_TOO_MANY_PGS 4 pools have too many placement groups Pool pve_cephfs_data has 128 placement groups, should have 16 Pool hdd has 512 placement groups, should have 64 Pool pve_cephfs_metadata has 32 placement groups, should have 4 Pool backup has 1024 placement groups, should have 4 I'm writing +90% of the data in pool "hdb_backup", and this is ongoing. Therefore I can hardly afford that this pool is full. When I check the output of ceph osd status the relevand osd is somehow overutilized: root@ld3955:/mnt/rbd# ceph osd status | grep nearfull +-----+--------+-------+-------+--------+---------+--------+---------+--------------------+ | id | host | used | avail | wr ops | wr data | rd ops | rd data | state | +-----+--------+-------+-------+--------+---------+--------+---------+--------------------+ | 122 | ld5505 | 1448G | 227G | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | exists,nearfull,up | This looks like an inconsistency, but I can check the usage with ceph osd df. Here I can see that the OSDs are not really balanced: root@ld3955:/mnt/rbd# ceph osd df ID CLASS WEIGHT REWEIGHT SIZE RAW USE DATA OMAP META AVAIL %USE VAR PGS STATUS 272 hdd 7.28000 1.00000 7.3 TiB 2.3 TiB 2.3 TiB 136 KiB 3.7 GiB 5.0 TiB 31.23 0.77 121 up 273 hdd 7.28000 1.00000 7.3 TiB 2.9 TiB 2.9 TiB 28 KiB 5.1 GiB 4.4 TiB 39.35 0.97 152 up 274 hdd 7.28000 1.00000 7.3 TiB 2.9 TiB 2.9 TiB 168 KiB 4.5 GiB 4.4 TiB 39.41 0.97 152 up 275 hdd 7.28000 1.00000 7.3 TiB 2.2 TiB 2.2 TiB 139 KiB 3.5 GiB 5.1 TiB 29.77 0.73 115 up 276 hdd 7.28000 1.00000 7.3 TiB 2.8 TiB 2.8 TiB 48 KiB 5.7 GiB 4.5 TiB 38.81 0.96 150 up 277 hdd 7.28000 1.00000 7.3 TiB 2.5 TiB 2.5 TiB 276 KiB 4.3 GiB 4.8 TiB 34.68 0.85 134 up 278 hdd 7.28000 1.00000 7.3 TiB 2.8 TiB 2.8 TiB 36 KiB 4.4 GiB 4.5 TiB 38.74 0.95 150 up 279 hdd 7.28000 1.00000 7.3 TiB 2.6 TiB 2.6 TiB 156 KiB 4.1 GiB 4.7 TiB 35.80 0.88 138 up 280 hdd 7.28000 1.00000 7.3 TiB 2.7 TiB 2.7 TiB 156 KiB 4.3 GiB 4.6 TiB 37.03 0.91 143 up 281 hdd 7.28000 1.00000 7.3 TiB 2.4 TiB 2.4 TiB 172 KiB 3.8 GiB 4.9 TiB 32.67 0.80 126 up 282 hdd 7.28000 1.00000 7.3 TiB 2.9 TiB 2.9 TiB 120 KiB 4.5 GiB 4.4 TiB 39.39 0.97 152 up 283 hdd 7.28000 1.00000 7.3 TiB 2.7 TiB 2.7 TiB 32 KiB 5.9 GiB 4.5 TiB 37.57 0.93 145 up [...] 76 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1.4 TiB 1.4 TiB 88 KiB 2.4 GiB 268 GiB 84.02 2.07 73 up 77 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 TiB 188 KiB 2.0 GiB 560 GiB 66.59 1.64 58 up 78 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1.0 TiB 1023 GiB 164 KiB 1.9 GiB 651 GiB 61.15 1.51 53 up 79 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1.0 TiB 1.0 TiB 176 KiB 1.9 GiB 636 GiB 62.02 1.53 54 up 80 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1.0 TiB 1.0 TiB 80 KiB 2.5 GiB 636 GiB 62.07 1.53 54 up 81 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 886 GiB 885 GiB 128 KiB 1.7 GiB 790 GiB 52.89 1.30 46 up 82 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 967 GiB 965 GiB 240 KiB 1.8 GiB 709 GiB 57.70 1.42 50 up 83 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1.2 TiB 1.2 TiB 64 KiB 2.2 GiB 420 GiB 74.94 1.85 65 up 84 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 TiB 108 KiB 2.0 GiB 597 GiB 64.37 1.59 56 up 85 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 811 GiB 810 GiB 176 KiB 1.6 GiB 865 GiB 48.42 1.19 42 up 86 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1.0 TiB 1.0 TiB 72 KiB 2.0 GiB 613 GiB 63.43 1.56 55 up 87 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 791 GiB 789 GiB 68 KiB 1.6 GiB 885 GiB 47.17 1.16 41 up 88 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 908 GiB 906 GiB 168 KiB 1.8 GiB 768 GiB 54.18 1.33 47 up [...] 113 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 100 KiB 3.0 GiB 342 GiB 79.60 1.96 69 up 114 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1001 GiB 999 GiB 184 KiB 1.9 GiB 675 GiB 59.70 1.47 52 up 115 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1.2 TiB 1.2 TiB 120 KiB 2.2 GiB 407 GiB 75.70 1.86 66 up 116 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 TiB 92 KiB 2.0 GiB 597 GiB 64.39 1.59 56 up 117 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1.2 TiB 1.2 TiB 76 KiB 2.7 GiB 480 GiB 71.34 1.76 62 up 118 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 TiB 48 KiB 2.6 GiB 574 GiB 65.74 1.62 57 up 119 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1.0 TiB 1.0 TiB 152 KiB 1.9 GiB 634 GiB 62.19 1.53 54 up 120 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 TiB 48 KiB 2.0 GiB 541 GiB 67.73 1.67 59 up 121 hdd 1.64000 1.00000 1.6 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 TiB 48 KiB 2.0 GiB 556 GiB 66.82 1.65 58 up 122 hdd 1.64000 0.95001 1.6 TiB 1.4 TiB 1.4 TiB 184 KiB 2.5 GiB 227 GiB 86.44 2.13 75 up I assume that this is a result of my Ceph Cluster history, means I started with 4 OSD nodes with 48 drives @1.8TB. This was 345TB in total. I started to fill this storage up to 75%. Then I added 2 OSD nodes with 48 drives @8TB. I was not expecting that pool "hdb_backup" would be filled up in the near future. This is the ouput of ceph df: root@ld3955:/mnt/rbd# ceph df RAW STORAGE: CLASS SIZE AVAIL USED RAW USED %RAW USED hdd 1.1 PiB 661 TiB 467 TiB 468 TiB 41.43 nvme 23 TiB 23 TiB 681 MiB 8.7 GiB 0.04 TOTAL 1.1 PiB 685 TiB 467 TiB 468 TiB 40.59 POOLS: POOL ID STORED OBJECTS USED %USED MAX AVAIL backup 4 0 B 0 0 B 0 35 TiB hdb_backup 11 154 TiB 40.39M 154 TiB 64.18 29 TiB hdd 30 1.1 TiB 281.21k 1.1 TiB 1.01 35 TiB pve_cephfs_data 32 318 GiB 91.83k 318 GiB 0.30 35 TiB pve_cephfs_metadata 33 155 MiB 61 155 MiB 0 35 TiB nvme 35 0 B 0 0 B 0 7.4 TiB Question: How can I start rebalancing data in order to have more data in the larger drives (8TB)? Or is it ok that the smaller drives (1.8TB) are filled by +60%? THX for your advice Thomas _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
 |