Re: Move on cephfs not O(1)?

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

 



On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 9:13 AM Frank Schilder <frans@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> yes, this is it, quotas. In the structure A/B/ there was a quota set on A. Hence, B was moved out of this zone and this does indeed change mv to be a cp+rm.
>
> The obvious follow-up. What is the procedure for properly moving data as an administrator? Do I really need to unset quotas, do the move and set quotas back again?

Ah-ha, this is a difference between the userspace and kernel clients.
:( The kernel client always returns EXDEV if crossing "quota realms"
(different quota roots). I'm not sure why it behaves that way as
userspace is different:
* If fhere is a quota in the target directory, and
* If the target directory's existing data, plus the file(s) being
moved, exceed the target directory's quota,
then userspace returns EXDEV/EDQUOT. This seems like the right kernel
behavior as well...

Jeff, is that a known issue for some reason? Should we make a new bug? :)
-Greg

>
> Best regards,
>
> =================
> Frank Schilder
> AIT Risø Campus
> Bygning 109, rum S14
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Frank Schilder <frans@xxxxxx>
> Sent: 26 March 2020 16:35:07
> To: Gregory Farnum; Beocat KSU
> Cc: ceph-users
> Subject:  Re: Move on cephfs not O(1)?
>
> Dear all, thanks for the hints. I was afraid I see ghosts.
>
> Yes, we have quotas on many directories. I'm not entirely sure if there were different quotas involved. I believe it was set only on the highest level, but now that you mention it ...
>
> I will try with quotas again, didn't include this in my scenario.
>
> This information is really important, because it will affect how I as an admin can move data between folders with quotas on them, which are typically used for sub-directory mounts. For a user this would look like a magical move between file systems.
>
> I will get back. Thanks!
>
> Best regards,
>
> =================
> Frank Schilder
> AIT Risø Campus
> Bygning 109, rum S14
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Gregory Farnum <gfarnum@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: 26 March 2020 15:20:51
> To: Beocat KSU
> Cc: ceph-users; Frank Schilder
> Subject: Re:  Re: Move on cephfs not O(1)?
>
> I was wondering that but at least in the userspace client the quotas
> will just throw EXDEV or EDQUOT if it will exceed quotas...
> ...and EXDEV might trigger the kernel to do a copy-and-delete, I
> guess? Not sure.
>
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 7:18 AM Adam Tygart <mozes@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Is there is a possibility that there was a quota involved? I've seen
> > moves between quota zones to cause a copy then delete.
> >
> > --
> > Adam
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 9:14 AM Gregory Farnum <gfarnum@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 5:49 AM Frank Schilder <frans@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Some time ago I made a surprising observation. I reorganised a directory structure and needed to move a folder one level up with a command like
> > > >
> > > > mv A/B/ B
> > > >
> > > > B contained something like 9TB in very large files. To my surprise, this command didn't return for a couple of minutes and I started to look what was going on. What I discovered was, that the mv command actually performed a full copy with a subsequent remove. I had to wait for several hours for the move to complete.
> > > >
> > > > I tried to reproduce this today to collect further information. However, this behaviour seems not reproducible. No matter what I try, mv completes almost instantly.
> > > >
> > > > I was running the original mv on mimic 13.2.2 and retried now with mimic 13.2.8. In addition, there was an OS upgrade from Centos 7.6 to 7.7. I'm using the kernel-ml versions (5.xxx). Only one cephfs mount was present at all times.
> > > >
> > > > My questions are:
> > > >
> > > > 1) Was there a change from 13.2.2 to 13.2.8 explaining this?
> > >
> > > No.
> > >
> > > > 2) Are there (rare) conditions under which an mv on cephfs becomes a cp+rm?
> > >
> > > Not as part of CephFS.
> > >
> > > > 3) Am I seeing ghosts?
> > >
> > > The only way I can imagine this happening is if you had separate
> > > CephFS mounts for cephfs/A/B and cephfs/ and you did the move between
> > > them, instead of within the cephfs/ mount. :/
> > > -Greg
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for clues and best regards,
> > > >
> > > > =================
> > > > Frank Schilder
> > > > AIT Risø Campus
> > > > Bygning 109, rum S14
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
> > > > To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
> > > To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
> >
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
>
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx




[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