On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 3:21 AM Eneko Lacunza <elacunza@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just made some basic tests, feature works nicely as far as I have tested :)
>
> I created 2 aditional pools each with a matching stretch rule:
> - size=2/min=1 (not advised I know)
> - size=6/min=3 (some kind of paranoid config)
>
> When entering degraded stretch mode, the following changed where made
> automatically:
> - size=4/min=2 -> size=4/min=1
> - size=2/min=1 -> size=2/min=0 (!)
> - size=6/min=3 -> size=6/min=1 (!)
>
> Not really sure about what calc is performed here, but:
> - It would be better to check not decrement min value below 1?
> - Changing min=3 to min=2 would be better (safer)?
>
Hah, probably. The calculation is just:
newp.min_size = pgi.second.min_size / 2; // only support 2 zones now
And then...
>
> Also, when stretch bucket was back online and after recovery was complete:
> - size=4/min=2 -> size=4/min=1 -> size=4/min=2
> - size=2/min=1 -> size=2/min=0 -> size=2/min=2
> - size=6/min=3 -> size=6/min=1 -> size=6/min=2
>
> This time it seems recovery is setting min=2 as a fixed value.
>
newp.min_size = g_conf().get_val<uint64_t>("mon_stretch_pool_min_size");
>
> Would it make sense that when entering degraded mode, min was set to
> min(round(size/2)-1, 1); and after recovery it was set to round(size/2)?
>
Yeah, that seems more sensible. I made a ticket:
https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/55573
Thanks!
-Greg
>
> Otherwise awesome feature really! :-)
>
> Cheers
>
>
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
