>> What reweighs have been set for the top OSDs (ceph osd df tree)? >> > Right now they are all at 1.0. I had to lower them to something close to > 0.2 in order to free up space but I changed them back to 1.0. Should I > lower them while the backfill is happening? Old-style legacy override reweights don’t mesh well with the balancer. Best to leave them at 1.00. 0.2 is pretty extreme, back in the day I rarely went below 0.8. >> ``` >> "optimize_result": "Too many objects (0.355160 > 0.050000) are misplaced; >> try again late >> ``` That should clear. The balancer doesn’t want to stir up trouble if the cluster already has a bunch of backfill / recovery going on. Patience! >> default.rgw.buckets.data 10 1024 197 TiB 133.75M 592 TiB 93.69 >> 13 TiB >> default.rgw.buckets.non-ec 11 32 78 MiB 1.43M 17 GiB That’s odd that the data pool is that full but the others aren’t. Please send `ceph osd crush rule dump `. And `ceph osd dump | grep pool` >> >> I also tried changing the following but it does not seem to persist: Could be an mclock thing. >> 1. Why I ended up with so many misplaced PG's since there were no changes >> on the cluster: number of osd's, hosts, etc. Probably a result of the autoscaler splitting PGs or of some change to CRUSH rules such that some data can’t be placed. >> 2. Is it ok to change the target_max_misplaced_ratio to something higher >> than .05 so the autobalancer would work and I wouldn't have to constantly >> rebalance the osd's manually? I wouldn’t, that’s a symptom not the disease. >> Bruno >> _______________________________________________ >> ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx >> To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx >> >> >> >> > > -- > Bruno Gomes Pessanha > _______________________________________________ > 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