Hi Dominique, The consistency of the data should not be at risk with such a problem. But on the other hand, it's better to solve the network problem. Perhaps look at the state of bond0 : cat /proc/net/bonding/bond0 As well as the usual network checks ________________________________________________________ Cordialement, *David CASIER* ________________________________________________________ Le mar. 7 nov. 2023 à 11:20, Dominique Ramaekers < dominique.ramaekers@xxxxxxxxxx> a écrit : > Hi, > > I'm using Ceph on a 4-host cluster for a year now. I recently discovered > the Ceph Dashboard :-) > > No I see that the Dashboard reports CephNodeNetworkPacketErrors >0.01% or > >10 packets/s... > > Although all systems work great, I'm worried. > > 'ip -s link show eno5' results: > 2: eno5: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,SLAVE,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq master > bond0 state UP mode DEFAULT group default qlen 1000 > link/ether 7a:3b:79:9c:f6:d1 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff permaddr > 5c:ba:2c:08:b3:90 > RX: bytes packets errors dropped missed mcast > 734153938129 645770129 20160 0 0 342301 > TX: bytes packets errors dropped carrier collsns > 1085134190597 923843839 0 0 0 0 > altname enp178s0f0 > > So in average 0,0003% of RX packet errors! > > All the four hosts uses the same 10Gb HP switch. The hosts themselves are > HP Proliant G10 servers. I would expect 0% packet loss... > > Anyway. Should I be worried about data consistency? Or can Ceph handle > this amount of packet errors? > > Greetings, > > Dominique. > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx > Le mar. 7 nov. 2023 à 11:20, Dominique Ramaekers < dominique.ramaekers@xxxxxxxxxx> a écrit : > Hi, > > I'm using Ceph on a 4-host cluster for a year now. I recently discovered > the Ceph Dashboard :-) > > No I see that the Dashboard reports CephNodeNetworkPacketErrors >0.01% or > >10 packets/s... > > Although all systems work great, I'm worried. > > 'ip -s link show eno5' results: > 2: eno5: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,SLAVE,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq master > bond0 state UP mode DEFAULT group default qlen 1000 > link/ether 7a:3b:79:9c:f6:d1 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff permaddr > 5c:ba:2c:08:b3:90 > RX: bytes packets errors dropped missed mcast > 734153938129 645770129 20160 0 0 342301 > TX: bytes packets errors dropped carrier collsns > 1085134190597 923843839 0 0 0 0 > altname enp178s0f0 > > So in average 0,0003% of RX packet errors! > > All the four hosts uses the same 10Gb HP switch. The hosts themselves are > HP Proliant G10 servers. I would expect 0% packet loss... > > Anyway. Should I be worried about data consistency? Or can Ceph handle > this amount of packet errors? > > Greetings, > > Dominique. > _______________________________________________ > 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
 |