If you are using cephadm, couldn't the host be removed from placing osds? On my cluster, I labeled the hosts for each service (OSD/MON/MGR/...) and have the services deployed by label. I believe that if you had that, then when a label is removed from the host the services eventually drain. -----Original Message----- From: Frédéric Nass <frederic.nass@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2024 11:30 AM To: Eugen Block <eblock@xxxxxx> Cc: ceph-users <ceph-users@xxxxxxx>; dev <dev@xxxxxxx> Subject: Re: ceph orch host drain daemon type Hello Eugen, A month back, while playing with a lab cluster, I drained a multi-service host (OSDs, MGR, MON, etc.) in order to recreate all of its OSDs. During this operation, all cephadm containers were removed as expected, including the MGR. As a result, I got into a situation where the orchestrator backend 'cephadm' was missing and wouldn't load anymore. I didn't have much time to investigate this, so I decided to recreate the lab cluster. But I think this is due to a bug. I would probably have avoided this situation if I had been able to ask the orchestrator to only drain services of type 'osd'. Makes sense. Cheers, Frédéric. ----- Le 27 Aoû 24, à 15:19, Eugen Block eblock@xxxxxx a écrit : > Hi, > > is there anything on the road map to be able to choose a specific > daemon type to be entirely removed from a host instead of all cephadm > managed daemons? I just did a quick search in tracker and github, but > it may be "hidden" somewhere else. > > I was thinking about colocated daemons on a host, for example MON, > MGR, OSDs, node-exporter, crash. That's quite common, but if I just > wanted to drain all OSDs (maybe mark them as "destroyed" in order to > replace the drives), the usual 'ceph orch host drain <host>' command > would remove all daemons. That seems unnecessary if I'm going to add > the OSDs back. > > Since there are a couple of other daemon types which can be deployed > multiple times per host, e. g. MDS, RGW, it doesn't only make sense > for OSDs but for other daemons as well. And those other daemons > usually have some cryptic suffix, we wouldn't need that in order to > get rid of them, it doesn't save that much time, but it could be a > nice enhancement. > > Should I create a tracker issue in the enhancement section for that? > > Thanks! > Eugen > _______________________________________________ > 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
 |