Hi Gary, It looks like everything you did is fine. I think the "problem" is that cephadm has/had some logic that tried to leave users with an odd number of monitors. I'm pretty sure this is why two of them were removed. This code has been removed in pacific, and should probably be backported to octopus. There is nothing wrong with an even number of mons. The only number you might want to avoid is 2 because a failure of either monitor will cause the cluster to lose quorum and become unavailable (quorum requires > N/2, which in a 2-mon case means both mons). As far as availability goes that is probably not ideal, but as far as durability goes, it's extremely useful to have a duplicate copy of the mon data so that losing a single disk doesn't destroy the cluster metadata (and require a complicated recovery process). In any case, generally speaking, nobody should worry about having an even number of monitors. Focus instead of getting >2 so you can tolerate at least one mon failure and keep the cluster running. On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 10:14 AM Gary Molenkamp <molenkam@xxxxxx> wrote: > A nautilus cluster with two mons (I know this is not correct for > quorum), a mgr, and a handful of osds. I went though the adoption Any number of monitors is correct. Less than 3 is not recommended. sage _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
 |