Never mind, I think I worked it out. I consulted the Quincy documentation which just said to do this: ceph config set osd osd_deep_scrub_large_omap_object_key_threshold 2000000 But when i did that, the health warning didn't clear. I took a guess that maybe I needed to trigger a deep scrub on that PG as it probably only checks the value against the threshold at scrub time, and when that was done, the health warning has now cleared. Not sure if that persists across restarts or not but I'll cross that bridge if/when I come to it. On Wed, 2023-08-02 at 05:31 +0000, Mark Johnson wrote: > Regarding changing this bvalue back to the previous default of > 2,000,000, how would I go about doing that? I tried following that > SUSE KB article which says to do this: > > ceph tell 'osd.*' injectargs -- > osd_deep_scrub_large_omap_object_key_threshold=2000000 > > But while that didn't fail as such, it didn't apply any changes. Is > there a way to apply this on the fly without restarting the cluster? > > > > > On Tue, 2023-08-01 at 22:44 +0000, Mark Johnson wrote: > Thanks for that. That's pretty much how I was reading it, but the > text you provided is a lot more explanatory than what I'd managed to > find and makes it a bit clearer. Without going into too much detail, > yes we do have a single user that is used to create multiple a bucket > for each of a multiple tenants on a daily basis. So, we'd be > creating many buckets each day and all owned by the same account. > Therefore, it's quite possible that there could be 400,000 buckets > owned by the one user. I don't know an easy way to get a figure - I > tried a "radosgw bucket stats" output to a file but after about 4 > hours it still hadn't returned anything so I gave up. > > I have a feeling that we do have a rolling clean out of objects in > these buckets, so we might be only keeping 3 months of data for some > customers, 6 months for others, 12 months for others etc. But, I > think one of our guys mentioned that the cleanup might not be getting > rid of buckets, only the files in them. So, I may have to get our > dev guys to revisit this and see if we can clean up a crapload of > empty buckets. > > > On Tue, 2023-08-01 at 08:37 +0000, Eugen Block wrote: > Thanks. Just for reference I'm quoting the SUSE doc [1] you mentioned > because it explains what you already summarized: > > User indices are not sharded, in other words we store all the keys > of names of buckets under one object. This can cause large objects > to be found. The large object is only accessed in the List All > Buckets S3/Swift API. Unlike bucket indices, the large object is not > exactly in the object IO path. Depending on the use case for so many > buckets, the warning isn't dangerous as the large object is only > used for the List All Buckets API. > The error shows a user has 500K buckets causing the omap issue. > Sharding does not occur at the user level. Bucket indexes are > sharded but buckets per user is not (and usually the default > max_bucket is 1000). > > Does this mean that you actually have a user with around 400k > buckets? > If you can't delete unused buckets (you already ruled out creating > multiple users) there's probably no way around increasing the > threshold, I guess. I'm not the biggest RGW expert but we have a few > customers where the threshold was actually increased to the previous > default to get rid of the warning (if other actions were not > possible). So far we didn't get any reports causing any issue at all. > But I'd be curious if the devs or someone with more experience has a > better advice. > > [1] https://www.suse.com/support/kb/doc/?id=000019698 > > Zitat von Mark Johnson > <markj@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:markj@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:markj@xxxxxxxxx<mailt > o:markj@xxxxxxxxx>>>: > > Here you go. It doesn't format very well, so I'll summarize what I'm > seeing. > > 5.c has 78051 OMAP_BYTES and 398 OMAP_KEYS > 5.16 has 80186950 OMAP_BYTES and 401505 OMAP_KEYS > > The remaining 30 PGS have zero of both. However, the BYTES for each > PG > is very much the same at around 8900000 for each. > > > # ceph pg ls-by-pool default.rgw.meta > > PG OBJECTS DEGRADED MISPLACED UNFOUND BYTES OMAP_BYTES* > OMAP_KEYS* LOG STATE SINCE VERSION > REPORTED UP ACTING SCRUB_STAMP > DEEP_SCRUB_STAMP LAST_SCRUB_DURATION > SCRUB_SCHEDULING > 5.0 26240 0 0 0 8909864 0 > 0 10076 active+clean 10h 8093'54176 > 8093:5396520 [21,4,12]p21 [21,4,12]p21 2023-07- > 31T21:13:20.554485+0000 2023-07-26T03:40:27.457946+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T23:55:14.134653+0000 > 5.1 26065 0 0 0 8840849 0 > 0 10029 active+clean 10h 8093'56529 > 8093:4891333 [14,7,23]p14 [14,7,23]p14 2023-07- > 31T20:37:34.920128+0000 2023-07-30T10:55:16.529046+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T21:12:04.440688+0000 > 5.2 26406 0 0 0 8943783 0 > 0 10076 active+clean 20h 8093'56776 > 8093:5022283 [26,8,25]p26 [26,8,25]p26 2023-07- > 31T11:08:00.886979+0000 2023-07-30T06:03:44.341435+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T16:02:32.076634+0000 > 5.3 26250 0 0 0 8932714 0 > 0 10086 active+clean 20h 8093'56786 > 8093:5109316 [0,26,32]p0 [0,26,32]p0 2023-07- > 31T11:02:35.864452+0000 2023-07-30T04:25:56.495524+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T20:18:30.975924+0000 > 5.4 26071 0 0 0 8874237 0 > 0 10024 active+clean 6h 8092'53824 > 8093:5146409 [15,7,34]p15 [15,7,34]p15 2023-08- > 01T01:16:48.361184+0000 2023-07-25T15:47:10.627594+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-02T12:32:06.359395+0000 > 5.5 26160 0 0 0 8870317 0 > 0 10073 active+clean 12h 8093'56173 > 8093:4706658 [9,31,16]p9 [9,31,16]p9 2023-07- > 31T18:52:26.301525+0000 2023-07-29T08:19:00.537322+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-02T02:11:16.267794+0000 > 5.6 26186 0 0 0 8904446 0 > 0 10084 active+clean 44m 8093'57584 > 8093:5032349 [7,10,38]p7 [7,10,38]p7 2023-08- > 01T06:37:45.184419+0000 2023-08-01T06:37:45.184419+0000 > 313 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-02T10:01:32.285716+0000 > 5.7 26292 0 0 0 8908213 0 > 0 9695 active+clean 87m 8093'56896 > 8093:4969718 [36,1,13]p36 [36,1,13]p36 2023-08- > 01T05:55:06.016287+0000 2023-07-30T21:49:33.028594+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-02T13:54:38.778542+0000 > 5.8 26323 0 0 0 8911110 0 > 0 9747 active+clean 3h 8093'56448 > 8093:4981465 [36,15,2]p36 [36,15,2]p36 2023-08- > 01T04:21:06.360778+0000 2023-07-29T14:46:02.363530+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-02T10:36:48.764085+0000 > 5.9 26035 0 0 0 8829430 0 > 0 10034 active+clean 20h 8093'56335 > 8093:4829155 [37,21,24]p37 [37,21,24]p37 2023-07- > 31T11:07:39.961751+0000 2023-07-31T11:07:39.961751+0000 > 309 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T22:42:18.862879+0000 > 5.a 26052 0 0 0 8859067 0 > 0 10087 active+clean 27h 8092'56087 > 8093:5022933 [2,23,10]p2 [2,23,10]p2 2023-07- > 31T03:28:44.433360+0000 2023-07-31T03:28:44.433360+0000 > 248 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T13:36:39.897693+0000 > 5.b 25759 0 0 0 8739834 0 > 0 9693 active+clean 15h 8090'56293 > 8093:4837010 [36,7,28]p36 [36,7,28]p36 2023-07- > 31T15:55:00.415967+0000 2023-07-31T15:55:00.415967+0000 > 323 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T23:41:03.756058+0000 > 5.c 25927 0 0 0 8788271 78051 > 398 10051 active+clean 24h 8093'174851 > 8093:4982667 [5,36,18]p5 [5,36,18]p5 2023-07- > 31T07:20:32.208533+0000 2023-07-31T07:20:32.208533+0000 > 315 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T18:18:15.292651+0000 > 5.d 25995 0 0 0 8815306 0 > 0 10070 active+clean 2h 8093'57270 > 8093:4994478 [32,13,16]p32 [32,13,16]p32 2023-08- > 01T04:27:55.863933+0000 2023-08-01T04:27:55.863933+0000 > 294 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-02T05:55:30.108279+0000 > 5.e 26253 0 0 0 8939984 0 > 0 10018 active+clean 5h 8092'56919 > 8093:5135033 [37,19,4]p37 [37,19,4]p37 2023-08- > 01T01:38:15.740983+0000 2023-07-30T21:55:45.349878+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-02T04:40:09.172157+0000 > 5.f 26025 0 0 0 8821973 0 > 0 10020 active+clean 25h 8093'53120 > 8093:4794909 [14,11,8]p14 [14,11,8]p14 2023-07- > 31T06:22:22.849194+0000 2023-07-25T02:42:24.135997+0000 > 5 periodic deep scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T13:50:38.914828+0000 > 5.10 25999 0 0 0 8821303 0 > 0 10048 active+clean 3h 8092'55848 > 8093:5151525 [39,27,14]p39 [39,27,14]p39 2023-08- > 01T03:40:44.355521+0000 2023-07-29T23:58:49.567904+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-02T04:44:52.459615+0000 > 5.11 26200 0 0 0 8897148 0 > 0 8909 active+clean 23h 8093'56309 > 8093:4858657 [35,24,23]p35 [35,24,23]p35 2023-07- > 31T08:19:21.090885+0000 2023-07-30T07:21:21.135342+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T13:09:38.620801+0000 > 5.12 26043 0 0 0 8803496 0 > 0 10016 active+clean 33h 8093'52716 > 8093:5090415 [21,35,3]p21 [21,35,3]p21 2023-07- > 30T22:10:31.308788+0000 2023-07-24T14:40:34.453392+0000 > 5 periodic deep scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T09:36:02.058413+0000 > 5.13 25929 0 0 0 8785411 0 > 0 10029 active+clean 16h 8090'54629 > 8093:5096641 [32,17,9]p32 [32,17,9]p32 2023-07- > 31T15:19:04.119491+0000 2023-07-27T16:36:53.401620+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T22:19:03.573063+0000 > 5.14 26102 0 0 0 8858274 0 > 0 10069 active+clean 89m 8093'54671 > 8093:4958083 [3,29,12]p3 [3,29,12]p3 2023-08- > 01T05:53:20.722831+0000 2023-07-27T11:29:26.930179+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-02T14:03:11.521746+0000 > 5.15 26122 0 0 0 8850708 0 > 0 9419 active+clean 14h 8093'57119 > 8093:4854254 [28,8,29]p28 [28,8,29]p28 2023-07- > 31T17:04:04.790500+0000 2023-07-31T17:04:04.790500+0000 > 309 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-02T04:29:01.728903+0000 > 5.16 26168 0 0 0 8869093 80186950 > 401505 10031 active+clean 32h 8093'122396977 > 8093:127435157 [26,39,9]p26 [26,39,9]p26 2023-07- > 30T23:19:12.784044+0000 2023-07-30T23:19:12.784044+0000 > 258 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T10:29:11.462563+0000 > 5.17 25504 0 0 0 8634818 0 > 0 10081 active+clean 23h 8093'55481 > 8093:4742014 [4,25,34]p4 [4,25,34]p4 2023-07- > 31T08:11:23.105601+0000 2023-07-31T08:11:23.105601+0000 > 309 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T15:11:19.240302+0000 > 5.18 26143 0 0 0 8846680 0 > 0 10014 active+clean 23h 8093'55015 > 8093:4927120 [22,11,36]p22 [22,11,36]p22 2023-07- > 31T08:18:27.757381+0000 2023-07-27T19:04:02.036522+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T16:25:12.741673+0000 > 5.19 26117 0 0 0 8864860 0 > 0 10073 active+clean 27h 8093'55173 > 8093:5001362 [1,28,27]p1 [1,28,27]p1 2023-07- > 31T03:37:40.525594+0000 2023-07-28T10:50:18.232627+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T15:06:48.300456+0000 > 5.1a 26186 0 0 0 8870466 0 > 0 10025 active+clean 31h 8093'54025 > 8093:4991279 [34,17,22]p34 [34,17,22]p34 2023-07- > 31T00:20:28.853158+0000 2023-07-25T21:31:55.045662+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T09:42:20.646380+0000 > 5.1b 26070 0 0 0 8854703 0 > 0 10087 active+clean 8h 8093'56487 > 8093:4886996 [22,7,37]p22 [22,7,37]p22 2023-07- > 31T22:39:17.793412+0000 2023-07-30T16:07:40.211725+0000 > 6 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T23:23:58.360930+0000 > 5.1c 26302 0 0 0 8925675 0 > 0 10015 active+clean 16h 8093'54915 > 8093:4986627 [33,11,2]p33 [33,11,2]p33 2023-07- > 31T15:07:27.474683+0000 2023-07-27T15:11:42.794360+0000 > 5 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T15:51:01.248015+0000 > 5.1d 26075 0 0 0 8839499 0 > 0 10075 active+clean 21h 8093'52575 > 8093:4857107 [33,16,17]p33 [33,16,17]p33 2023-07- > 31T09:23:24.577919+0000 2023-07-24T16:52:37.965968+0000 > 5 periodic deep scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-01T11:33:35.067584+0000 > 5.1e 26182 0 0 0 8905099 0 > 0 8905 active+clean+scrubbing+deep 4m 8093'56905 > 8093:4936987 [35,20,15]p35 [35,20,15]p35 2023-07- > 31T04:25:51.171690+0000 2023-07-24T14:28:19.531701+0000 > 5 deep scrubbing for 259s > 5.1f 25978 0 0 0 8796478 0 > 0 10068 active+clean 13h 8092'56868 > 8093:4813791 [26,30,13]p26 [26,30,13]p26 2023-07- > 31T17:50:40.349450+0000 2023-07-31T17:50:40.349450+0000 > 311 periodic scrub scheduled @ 2023-08-02T04:39:41.913504+0000 > > > On Tue, 2023-08-01 at 06:14 +0000, Eugen Block wrote: > Yeah, regarding data distribution increasing the pg_num of the data > pool is recommended. But could you also share the output of: > > ceph pg ls-by-pool default.rgw.meta > > That's where the large omap was reported, maybe you'll need to > increase the pg_num for that pool as well. Personally, I always > disable the autoscaler. > > Zitat von Mark Johnson > <markj@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:markj@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:markj@xxxxxxxxx<mailt > o:markj@xxxxxxxxx>>>: > > Thanks Bailey, > > With regards to the PG count, we've been relying on PG autoscale > and > it is currently enabled. I figure I'd need to disable autoscale > and > manually increase the PG count on the default.rgw.buckets.data > pool, > correct? We're coming from our existing clusters running Jewel to > this new Quincy cluster and have no prior experience with > autoscale > so we were just assuming autoscale would manage PG counts better > than us doing it manually. As you can probably guess, we don't > have > much experience with Ceph. > > Regards, > Mark Johnson > > > On Mon, 2023-07-31 at 21:54 -0300, Bailey Allison wrote: > [You don't often get email from > ballison@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:ballison@xxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:ballison@4 > 5drives.com<mailto:ballison@xxxxxxxxxxxx>><mailto:ballison@45drives.c > om<mailto:ballison@xxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:ballison@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto: > ballison@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>>. Learn why > this > is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ;] > > Hi, > > It appears you have quite a low PG count on your cluster (approx. > 20 > PGs per each OSD). > > Usually is recommended to have about 100-150 per each OSD. With a > lower PG count you can have issues with balancing data and cause > errors such as large OMAP objects. > > Might not be the fix in this case but either way would still > recommend increasing PGs on your pools. > > If you look at the OMAP value in your ceph osd df you can see that > some OSDs have 2GB while some have 500MB. Even for data some > drives > are holding 900GB while others 2TB. > > You will have to issue a deep-scrub on the PGs as well to get > updated OMAP data once the PGs are increased. > > Regards, > > Bailey > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Johnson > <markj@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:markj@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:markj@xxxxxxxxx<mailt > o:markj@xxxxxxxxx>><mailto:markj@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:markj@xxxxxxxxx><ma > ilto:markj@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:markj@xxxxxxxxx>>>> > Sent: July 31, 2023 9:01 PM > To: > eblock@xxxxxx<mailto:eblock@xxxxxx><mailto:eblock@xxxxxx<mailto:ebloc > k@xxxxxx>><mailto:eblock@xxxxxx<mailto:eblock@xxxxxx><mailto:eblock@n > de.ag<mailto:eblock@xxxxxx>>>; > ceph-users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxx><mailto:ceph- > users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxx>><mailto:ceph- > users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxx><mailto:ceph- > users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxx>>> > Subject: Re: 1 Large omap object found > > Sure thing. Thanks for the reply. > > ceph df > > --- RAW STORAGE --- > CLASS SIZE AVAIL USED RAW USED %RAW USED > hdd 291 TiB 244 TiB 47 TiB 47 TiB 16.02 > TOTAL 291 TiB 244 TiB 47 TiB 47 TiB 16.02 > > --- POOLS --- > POOL ID PGS STORED OBJECTS USED > %USED > MAX AVAIL > .mgr 1 1 459 MiB 116 1.3 GiB > 0 > 65 TiB > .rgw.root 2 32 1.3 KiB 4 48 KiB > 0 > 65 TiB > default.rgw.log 3 32 5.3 KiB 209 468 KiB > 0 > 65 TiB > default.rgw.control 4 32 0 B 8 0 B > 0 > 65 TiB > default.rgw.meta 5 32 452 MiB 828.75k 10 GiB > 0 > 65 TiB > default.rgw.buckets.index 6 32 17 GiB 4.56M 51 GiB > 0.03 > 65 TiB > default.rgw.buckets.data 7 128 15 TiB 54.51M 46 TiB > 19.24 > 65 TiB > cephfs_metadata 8 16 258 MiB 98 775 MiB > 0 > 65 TiB > cephfs_data 9 32 1.9 GiB 998 5.6 GiB > 0 > 65 TiB > > > ceph osd df > > ID CLASS WEIGHT REWEIGHT SIZE RAW USE DATA OMAP > META > AVAIL %USE VAR PGS STATUS > 0 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.6 TiB 1.6 TiB 550 MiB > 12 > GiB 5.7 TiB 21.70 1.35 21 up > 1 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 995 GiB 986 GiB 1.1 GiB > 7.6 > GiB 6.3 TiB 13.35 0.83 28 up > 2 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 996 GiB 986 GiB 2.1 GiB > 7.9 > GiB 6.3 TiB 13.37 0.83 22 up > 3 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 513 MiB > 10 > GiB 5.9 TiB 18.35 1.15 28 up > 4 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 TiB 527 MiB > 8.3 > GiB 6.2 TiB 15.02 0.94 22 up > 5 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.8 TiB 1.8 TiB 1.5 GiB > 14 > GiB 5.5 TiB 25.01 1.56 28 up > 6 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 746 GiB 739 GiB 1.0 GiB > 5.8 > GiB 6.5 TiB 10.01 0.63 20 up > 7 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 GiB > 8.8 > GiB 6.2 TiB 15.04 0.94 20 up > 8 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 871 GiB 864 GiB 544 MiB > 6.7 > GiB 6.4 TiB 11.69 0.73 27 up > 9 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 3.3 GiB > 11 > GiB 5.9 TiB 18.37 1.15 28 up > 30 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.8 TiB 1.8 TiB 1.6 GiB > 14 > GiB 5.5 TiB 25.01 1.56 35 up > 31 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 747 GiB 739 GiB 2.2 GiB > 6.2 > GiB 6.5 TiB 10.03 0.63 20 up > 32 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 996 GiB 987 GiB 1.5 GiB > 7.9 > GiB 6.3 TiB 13.37 0.83 26 up > 33 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 995 GiB 985 GiB 1.5 GiB > 7.7 > GiB 6.3 TiB 13.35 0.83 25 up > 34 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 750 GiB 742 GiB 2.1 GiB > 5.7 > GiB 6.5 TiB 10.07 0.63 25 up > 35 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 2.1 TiB 2.0 TiB 571 MiB > 15 > GiB 5.2 TiB 28.36 1.77 34 up > 36 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 1.5 GiB > 10 > GiB 5.9 TiB 18.37 1.15 31 up > 37 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 TiB 524 MiB > 8.2 > GiB 6.2 TiB 14.99 0.94 26 up > 38 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.6 TiB 1.6 TiB 1.6 GiB > 12 > GiB 5.7 TiB 21.70 1.35 28 up > 39 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.5 TiB 1.4 TiB 2.4 GiB > 11 > GiB 5.8 TiB 20.04 1.25 30 up > 10 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 1.6 GiB > 10 > GiB 5.9 TiB 18.34 1.14 26 up > 12 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 1 KiB > 9.9 > GiB 5.9 TiB 18.37 1.15 25 up > 14 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.5 TiB 1.4 TiB 593 MiB > 10 > GiB 5.8 TiB 19.98 1.25 22 up > 16 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 997 GiB 987 GiB 2.2 GiB > 7.5 > GiB 6.3 TiB 13.38 0.84 19 up > 18 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 GiB > 8.7 > GiB 6.2 TiB 15.02 0.94 26 up > 20 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.6 TiB 1.6 TiB 1.1 GiB > 12 > GiB 5.7 TiB 21.68 1.35 26 up > 22 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 559 MiB > 10 > GiB 5.9 TiB 18.34 1.14 22 up > 24 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 872 GiB 864 GiB 1020 MiB > 6.8 > GiB 6.4 TiB 11.70 0.73 23 up > 26 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 749 GiB 741 GiB 1.8 GiB > 6.3 > GiB 6.5 TiB 10.05 0.63 25 up > 28 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 1.5 GiB > 10 > GiB 5.9 TiB 18.36 1.15 32 up > 11 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 TiB 2.6 GiB > 8.5 > GiB 6.2 TiB 15.02 0.94 23 up > 13 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 1.3 TiB 2.2 GiB > 10 > GiB 5.9 TiB 18.38 1.15 36 up > 15 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 995 GiB 986 GiB 1.1 GiB > 7.7 > GiB 6.3 TiB 13.35 0.83 25 up > 17 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 623 GiB 618 GiB 419 KiB > 5.0 > GiB 6.7 TiB 8.35 0.52 23 up > 19 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 870 GiB 863 GiB 513 MiB > 6.6 > GiB 6.4 TiB 11.67 0.73 21 up > 21 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.5 GiB > 8.6 > GiB 6.2 TiB 15.02 0.94 25 up > 23 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 746 GiB 739 GiB 564 MiB > 5.8 > GiB 6.5 TiB 10.01 0.62 22 up > 25 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 TiB 2.1 GiB > 8.4 > GiB 6.2 TiB 15.03 0.94 24 up > 27 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.2 TiB 1.2 TiB 532 MiB > 9.1 > GiB 6.1 TiB 16.68 1.04 23 up > 29 hdd 7.27739 1.00000 7.3 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 TiB 1.1 GiB > 8.4 > GiB 6.2 TiB 14.99 0.94 19 up > TOTAL 291 TiB 47 TiB 46 TiB 51 GiB > 359 > GiB 244 TiB 16.02 > MIN/MAX VAR: 0.52/1.77 STDDEV: 4.56 > > > On Mon, 2023-07-31 at 09:22 +0000, Eugen Block wrote: > Hi, > > can you share some more details like 'ceph df' and 'ceph osd df'? I > don't have too much advice yet, but to see all entries in your meta > pool you need add the --all flag because those objects are stored > in > namespaces: > > rados -p default.rgw.meta ls --all > > That pool contains user and bucket information (example): > > # rados -p default.rgw.meta ls --all > users.uid admin.buckets > users.keys c0fba3ea7d9c4321b5205752c85baa85 users.uid > admin > users.keys JBWPRAPP1AQG471AMGC4 users.uid > e434b82737cf4138b899c0785b49112d.buckets > users.uid e434b82737cf4138b899c0785b49112d > > > > Zitat von Mark Johnson > <markj@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:markj@xxxxxxxxx><mailto:markj@xxxxxxxxx<mailt > o:markj@xxxxxxxxx>><mailto:markj@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:markj@xxxxxxxxx><ma > ilto:markj@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:markj@xxxxxxxxx>>>>: > > I've been going round and round in circles trying to work this one > out but I'm getting nowhere. We're running a 4 node quincy cluster > (17.2.6) which recently reported the following: > > ceph.log-20230729.gz:2023-07-28T08:31:42.390003+0000 osd.26 > (osd.26) > 13834 : cluster [WRN] Large omap object found. Object: > 5:6c65dd84:users.uid::callrecordings$callrecordings_rw.buckets:head > > PG: 5.21bba636 (5.16) Key count: 378454 Size (bytes): 75565579 > > This happened a week or so ago (only the key count was only just > over the 200000 threshold on that occasion) and after much > searching > around, I found an article that suggested a deep scrub on the pg > would likely resolve the issue, so I forced a deep scrub and > shortly > after, the warning cleared. Came into the office today to discover > the above. It's on the same PG as before which is in the > default.rgw.meta pool. This time, after forcing a deep-scrub on > that PG, nothing changed. I did it a second time just to be sure > but got the same result. > > I keep finding a suse article that simply suggests increasing the > threshold to the previous default of 2,000,000, but other articles > I > read say it was lowered for a reason and that by the time it hits > that figure, it's too late so I don't want to just mask it. > Problem > is that I don't really understand it. I found a thread here from > a > bit over two years ago but their issue was in the > default.rgw.buckets.index pool. A step in the solution was to list > out the problematic object id and check the objects per shard > however, if I issue the command "rados -p default.rgw.meta ls" it > returns nothing. I get a big list from "rados -p > default.rgw.buckets.index ls" just nothing from the first pool. I > think it may be because the meta pool isn't indexed based on > something I read, but I really don't know what I'm talking about > tbh. > > I don't know if this is helpful, but if I list out all the PGs for > that pool, there are 32 PGs and 5.16 shows 80186950 bytes and > 401505 > keys. PG 5.c has 75298 and 384 keys. The remaining 30 PGs show > zero bytes and zero keys. I'm really not sure how to troubleshoot > and resolve from here. For the record, dynamic resharding is > enabled in that no options have been set in the config and that is > the default setting. > > Based on the suse article I mentioned which also references the > default.rgw.meta pool, I'm gathering our issue is because we have > so > many buckets that are all owned by the one user and the solution is > either: > > * delete unused buckets > * create multiple users and spread buckets evenly across all users > (not something we can do) > * increase the threshold to stop the warning > > Problem is that I'm having trouble verifying this is the issue. > I've > tried dumping out bucket stats to a file (radosgw-admin bucket > stats > bucket_stats.txt) but after three hours this is still running with > no output. > > Thanks for your time, > Mark > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list -- > ceph-users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxx><mailto:ceph- > users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxx>><mailto:ceph- > users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxx><mailto:ceph- > users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxx>>> To unsubscribe send > an > email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users- > leave@xxxxxxx><mailto:ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users- > leave@xxxxxxx>><mailto:ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users- > leave@xxxxxxx><mailto:ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users- > leave@xxxxxxx>>> > > > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list -- > ceph-users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxx><mailto:ceph- > users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxx>><mailto:ceph- > users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxx><mailto:ceph- > users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxx>>> To unsubscribe send > an > email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users- > leave@xxxxxxx><mailto:ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users- > leave@xxxxxxx>><mailto:ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users- > leave@xxxxxxx><mailto:ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users- > leave@xxxxxxx>>> > > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list -- > ceph-users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxx><mailto:ceph- > users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxx>><mailto:ceph- > users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxx><mailto:ceph- > users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users@xxxxxxx>>> To unsubscribe send > an > email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users- > leave@xxxxxxx><mailto:ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users- > leave@xxxxxxx>><mailto:ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users- > leave@xxxxxxx><mailto:ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph-users- > leave@xxxxxxx>>> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx<mailto:ceph- > users@xxxxxxx> > To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx<mailto: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
 |