> > Helllo, > > I've reviewed some recent posts in this list and also searched Google for > info about autoscale and overlapping roots. In what I have found I do not > see anything that I can understand regarding how to fix the issue - > probably because I don't deal with Crush on a regular basis. Checkout the Note in this section: https://docs.ceph.com/en/reef/rados/operations/placement-groups/#viewing-pg-scaling-recommendations I added that last year I think it was as a result of how Rook was creating pools. > > From what I read and looking at 'ceph osd crush rule dump', it looks like > the 8 replicated pools have > > "op": "take", > "item": -1, > "item_name": "default" > > whereas the 2 EC pools have > > "op": "take", > "item": -2, > "item_name": "default~hdd" > > To be sure, all of my OSDs are identical - HDD with SSD WAL/DB. > > Please advise on how to fix this. The subtlety that's easy to miss is that when you specify a device class for only *some* pools, the pools/rules that specify a device class effectively act on a "shadow" CRUSH root. My terminology may be inexact there. So I think if you adjust your CRUSH rules so that they all specify a device class -- in your case all the same device class -- your problem (and balancer performance perhaps) will improve. _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
 |