Hi,
I have the following Ceph Mimic setup :
- a bunch of old servers with 3-4 SATA drives each (74 OSDs in total)
- index/leveldb is stored on each OSD (so no SSD drives, just SATA)
- the current usage is :
GLOBAL:
SIZE AVAIL RAW USED %RAW USED
542 TiB 105 TiB 437 TiB 80.67
POOLS:
NAME ID USED %USED MAX
AVAIL OBJECTS
.rgw.root 1 1.1 KiB 0 26
TiB 4
default.rgw.control 2 0 B 0 26
TiB 8
default.rgw.meta 3 20 MiB 0 26
TiB 75357
default.rgw.log 4 0 B 0 26
TiB 4271
default.rgw.buckets.data 5 290 TiB 85.05 51 TiB
78067284
default.rgw.buckets.non-ec 6 0 B 0 26
TiB 0
default.rgw.buckets.index 7 0 B 0 26
TiB 603008
- rgw_override_bucket_index_max_shards = 16. Clients are accessing RGW
via Swift, not S3.
- the replication schema is EC 4+2.
We are using this Ceph cluster as a secondary storage for another
storage infrastructure (which is more expensive) and we are offloading
cold data (big files with a low number of downloads/reads from our
customer). This way we can lower the TCO . So most of the files are big
( a few GB at least).
So far Ceph is doing well considering that I don't have big
expectations from current hardware. I'm a bit worried however that we
have 78 M objects with max_shards=16 and we will probably reach 100M in
the next few months. Do I need a increase the max shards to ensure the
stability of the cluster ? I read that storing more than 1 M of objects
in a single bucket can lead to OSD's flapping or having io timeouts
during deep-scrub or even to have ODS's failures due to the leveldb
compacting all the time if we have a large number of DELETEs.
Any advice would be appreciated.
Thank you,
Adrian Nicolae
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
