Thanks for your input: There are buckets with over 15m files and >300 shards, but yesterday a customer with 2.5m files and 101 shards complained about the slowness of listing files. We do not have indexless buckets. I am not sure if a customer can create such a bucket on their own via the usual tooling, but we do not create such buckets. I am happy to know that the default settings go up to 1999 shards, and I reshard on my own (because we have a multi zonegroup setting, without replication of buckets). So I tent to "overshard" buckets a bit (jump from 11 to 101 to 263) because I don't want to monitor the logfile continuously. Am Mo., 29. Aug. 2022 um 19:49 Uhr schrieb Matt Benjamin < mbenjami@xxxxxxxxxx>: > We choose prime number shard counts, yes. > Indexless buckets do increase insert-delete performance, but by > definition, though, an indexless bucket cannot be listed. > > Matt > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 1:46 PM Anthony D'Atri <anthony.datri@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > >> Do I recall that the number of shards is ideally odd, or even prime? >> Performance might be increased by indexless buckets if the application can >> handle >> >> > On Aug 29, 2022, at 10:06 AM, J. Eric Ivancich <ivancich@xxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >> > >> > Generally it’s a good thing. There’s less contention for bucket index >> updates when, for example, lots of writes are happening together. Dynamic >> resharding will take things up to 1999 shards on its own with the default >> config. >> > >> > Given that we use hashing of objet names to determine which shard they >> go to, the most complicated operation is bucket listing, which has to >> retrieve entries from each shard, order them, and return them to the >> client. And it has to do this in batches of about 1000 at a time. >> > >> > It looks like you’re expecting on the order of 10,000,000 objects in >> these buckets, so I imagine you’re not going to be listing them with any >> regularity. >> > >> > Eric >> > (he/him) >> > >> >> On Aug 29, 2022, at 12:06 PM, Boris Behrens <bb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi there, >> >> >> >> I have some buckets that would require >100 shards and I would like to >> ask >> >> if there are any downsides to have these many shards on a bucket? >> >> >> >> Cheers >> >> Boris >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> 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 >> > > > -- > > Matt Benjamin > Red Hat, Inc. > 315 West Huron Street, Suite 140A > Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103 > > http://www.redhat.com/en/technologies/storage > > tel. 734-821-5101 > fax. 734-769-8938 > cel. 734-216-5309 > -- Die Selbsthilfegruppe "UTF-8-Probleme" trifft sich diesmal abweichend im groüen Saal. _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
 |