Re: find PG with large omap object

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://gist.github.com/RaminNietzsche/b8702014c333f3a44a995d5a6d4a56be

On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 4:27 PM Frank Schilder <frans@xxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi Eugen,
>
> the warning threshold is per omap object, not per PG (which apparently has
> more than 1 omap object). Still, I misread the numbers by 1 order, which
> means that the difference between the last 2 entries is about 100000, which
> does point towards a large omap object in PG 12.193.
>
> I issued a deep-scrub on this PG and the warning is resolved.
>
> Thanks and best regards,
> =================
> Frank Schilder
> AIT Risø Campus
> Bygning 109, rum S14
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Eugen Block <eblock@xxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 2:41 PM
> To: Frank Schilder
> Cc: ceph-users@xxxxxxx
> Subject: Re:  Re: find PG with large omap object
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> > # jq '[.pg_stats[] | {"id": .pgid, "nk": .stat_sum.num_omap_keys}] |
> > sort_by(.nk)' pgs.dump | tail
> >   },
> >   {
> >     "id": "12.17b",
> >     "nk": 1493776
> >   },
> >   {
> >     "id": "12.193",
> >     "nk": 1583589
> >   }
>
> those numbers are > 1 million and the warning threshold is 200k. So a
> warning is expected.
>
> Zitat von Frank Schilder <frans@xxxxxx>:
>
> > Hi Eugen,
> >
> > thanks for the one-liner :) I'm afraid I'm in the same position as
> > before though.
> >
> > I dumped all PGs to a file and executed these 2 commands:
> >
> > # jq '[.pg_stats[] | {"id": .pgid, "nk": .stat_sum.num_omap_bytes}]
> > | sort_by(.nk)' pgs.dump | tail
> >   },
> >   {
> >     "id": "12.193",
> >     "nk": 1002401056
> >   },
> >   {
> >     "id": "21.0",
> >     "nk": 1235777228
> >   }
> > ]
> >
> > # jq '[.pg_stats[] | {"id": .pgid, "nk": .stat_sum.num_omap_keys}] |
> > sort_by(.nk)' pgs.dump | tail
> >   },
> >   {
> >     "id": "12.17b",
> >     "nk": 1493776
> >   },
> >   {
> >     "id": "12.193",
> >     "nk": 1583589
> >   }
> > ]
> >
> > Neither is beyond the warn limit and pool 12 is indeed the pool
> > where the warnings came from. OK, now back to the logs:
> >
> > # zgrep -i 'Large omap object found. Object:' /var/log/ceph/ceph.log-*
> > /var/log/ceph/ceph.log-20231008.gz:2023-10-05T01:25:14.581962+0200
> > osd.592 (osd.592) 104 : cluster [WRN] Large omap object found.
> > Object: 12:c05de58b:::63b.00000000:head PG: 12.d1a7ba03 (12.3) Key
> > count: 200001 Size (bytes): 230080309
> > /var/log/ceph/ceph.log-20231008.gz:2023-10-07T04:33:02.678879+0200
> > osd.949 (osd.949) 6897 : cluster [WRN] Large omap object found.
> > Object: 12:c9a32586:::63a.00000000:head PG: 12.61a4c593 (12.193) Key
> > count: 200243 Size (bytes): 230307097
> > /var/log/ceph/ceph.log-20231008.gz:2023-10-07T07:22:40.512228+0200
> > osd.988 (osd.988) 4365 : cluster [WRN] Large omap object found.
> > Object: 12:eb96322f:::637.00000000:head PG: 12.f44c69d7 (12.1d7) Key
> > count: 200329 Size (bytes): 230310393
> > /var/log/ceph/ceph.log-20231008.gz:2023-10-07T15:08:03.785186+0200
> > osd.50 (osd.50) 4549 : cluster [WRN] Large omap object found.
> > Object: 12:08fb0eb7:::635.00000000:head PG: 12.ed70df10 (12.110) Key
> > count: 200183 Size (bytes): 230150641
> > /var/log/ceph/ceph.log-20231008.gz:2023-10-07T16:37:12.901470+0200
> > osd.18 (osd.18) 7011 : cluster [WRN] Large omap object found.
> > Object: 12:d6758956:::634.00000000:head PG: 12.6a91ae6b (12.6b) Key
> > count: 200247 Size (bytes): 230343371
> > /var/log/ceph/ceph.log-20231008.gz:2023-10-08T01:25:16.125068+0200
> > osd.980 (osd.980) 308 : cluster [WRN] Large omap object found.
> > Object: 12:63f985e7:::639.00000000:head PG: 12.e7a19fc6 (12.1c6) Key
> > count: 200160 Size (bytes): 230179282
> > /var/log/ceph/ceph.log-20231015:2023-10-09T00:51:32.587849+0200
> > osd.563 (osd.563) 3661 : cluster [WRN] Large omap object found.
> > Object: 12:44346421:::632.00000000:head PG: 12.84262c22 (12.22) Key
> > count: 200325 Size (bytes): 230481029
> > /var/log/ceph/ceph.log-20231015:2023-10-09T15:35:28.803117+0200
> > osd.949 (osd.949) 7088 : cluster [WRN] Large omap object found.
> > Object: 12:c9a32586:::63a.00000000:head PG: 12.61a4c593 (12.193) Key
> > count: 200327 Size (bytes): 230404872
> > /var/log/ceph/ceph.log-20231015:2023-10-09T18:51:35.615096+0200
> > osd.592 (osd.592) 461 : cluster [WRN] Large omap object found.
> > Object: 12:c05de58b:::63b.00000000:head PG: 12.d1a7ba03 (12.3) Key
> > count: 200228 Size (bytes): 230347361
> >
> > The warnings report a key count > 200000, but none of the PGs in the
> > dump does. Apparently, all these PGs were (deep-) scrubbed already
> > and the omap key count was updated (or am I misunderstanding
> > something here). I still don't know and can neither conclude which
> > PG the warning originates from. As far as I can tell, the warning
> > should not be there.
> >
> > Do you have an idea how to continue diagnosis from here apart from
> > just trying a deep scrub on all PGs in the list from the log?
> >
> > Thanks and best regards,
> > =================
> > Frank Schilder
> > AIT Risø Campus
> > Bygning 109, rum S14
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Eugen Block <eblock@xxxxxx>
> > Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 1:41 PM
> > To: ceph-users@xxxxxxx
> > Subject:  Re: find PG with large omap object
> >
> > Hi,
> > not sure if this is what you need, but if you know the pool id (you
> > probably should) you could try this, it's from an Octopus test cluster
> > (assuming the warning was for the number of keys, not bytes):
> >
> > $ ceph -f json pg dump pgs 2>/dev/null | jq -r '.pg_stats[] | select
> > (.pgid | startswith("17.")) |  .pgid + " " +
> > "\(.stat_sum.num_omap_keys)"'
> > 17.6 191
> > 17.7 759
> > 17.4 358
> > 17.5 0
> > 17.2 177
> > 17.3 1
> > 17.0 375
> > 17.1 176
> >
> > If you don't know the pool you could sort the ouput by the second
> > column and see which PG has the largest number of omap_keys.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Eugen
> >
> > Zitat von Frank Schilder <frans@xxxxxx>:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> we had a bunch of large omap object warnings after a user deleted a
> >> lot of files on a ceph fs with snapshots. After the snapshots were
> >> rotated out, all but one of these warnings disappeared over time.
> >> However, one warning is stuck and I wonder if its something else.
> >>
> >> Is there a reasonable way (say, one-liner with no more than 120
> >> characters) to get ceph to tell me which PG this is coming from? I
> >> just want to issue a deep scrub to check if it disappears and going
> >> through the logs and querying every single object for its key count
> >> seems a bit of a hassle for something that ought to be part of "ceph
> >> health detail".
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> =================
> >> Frank Schilder
> >> AIT Risø Campus
> >> Bygning 109, rum S14
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
>
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Ceph Development]     [Ceph Large]     [Ceph Dev]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux