Re: What is the problem with many PGs per OSD

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

 



Hi Janne.

> To be fair, this number could just be something vaguely related to
> "spin drives have 100-200 iops" ...

It could be, but is it? Or is it just another rumor? I simply don't see how the PG count could possibly impact Io load on a disk.

How about this guess: It could be dragged along from a time when HDDs were <=1T and it simply means to have PGs not larger than 10G. Sounds reasonable, but is it?

I think we should really stop second-guessing here. This discussion was not meant to be a long thread where we all just guess but never know. I would appreciate if someone who actually knows something about why this recommendation is really there would ship in here. As far as I can tell, it could be anything or nothing. I actually tend toward its nothing, it was just never updated along with new developments and nowadays nobody knows any more.

Best regards,
=================
Frank Schilder
AIT Risø Campus
Bygning 109, rum S14

________________________________________
From: Janne Johansson <icepic.dz@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2024 8:51 AM
To: Frank Schilder
Cc: Anthony D'Atri; ceph-users@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re:  Re: What is the problem with many PGs per OSD

Den ons 9 okt. 2024 kl 20:48 skrev Frank Schilder <frans@xxxxxx>:

> The PG count per OSD is a striking exception. Its just a number (well a range with 100 recommended and 200 as a max: https://docs.ceph.com/en/latest/rados/operations/pgcalc/#keyDL). It just is. And this doesn't make any sense unless there is something really evil lurking in the dark.
> For comparison, a guidance that does make sense is something like 100PGs per TB. That I would vaguely understand: to keep the average PG size constant at a max of about 10G.

To be fair, this number could just be something vaguely related to
"spin drives have 100-200 iops", and while cent/rhel linux kernels 10
years ago did have some issues in getting io done in parallel as much
as possible towards a single device, doing multiple OSDs on flash
devices would have been both a way to get around this limitation in
the IO middle layer, and a way to "tell" ceph it can send more IO to
the device since it has multiple OSDs on it.

--
May the most significant bit of your life be positive.
_______________________________________________
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