I never used fqdn this way, but there is an option for cephadm bootstrap command --allow-fqdn-hostname allow hostname that is fully-qualified (contains ".") Worth checking. Not sure what's behind. Thanks On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 at 12:14, Piotr Pisz <piotr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > We add hosts to the cluster using fqdn, manually (ceph orch host add) > everything works fine. > However, if we use the spec file as below, the whole thing falls apart. > > --- > service_type: host > addr: xx.xx.xx.xx > hostname: ceph001.xx002.xx.xx.xx.com > location: > root: xx002 > rack: rack01 > labels: > - osd > - rgw > --- > service_type: osd > service_id: object_hdd > service_name: osd.object_hdd > placement: > host_pattern: ceph* > crush_device_class: object_hdd > spec: > data_devices: > rotational: 1 > db_devices: > rotational: 0 > size: '3000G:' > --- > service_type: osd > service_id: index_nvme > service_name: osd.index_nvme > placement: > host_pattern: ceph* > crush_device_class: index_nvme > spec: > data_devices: > rotational: 0 > size: ':900G' > > Applying this spec results in two hosts, one fqdn and the other short: > > root@mon001(xx002):~/cephadm# ceph osd df tree > ID CLASS WEIGHT REWEIGHT SIZE RAW USE DATA OMAP > META > AVAIL %USE VAR PGS STATUS TYPE NAME > -4 0 - 0 B 0 B 0 B 0 B > 0 B 0 B 0 0 - root dias002 > -3 0 - 0 B 0 B 0 B 0 B > 0 B 0 B 0 0 - rack rack01 > -2 0 - 0 B 0 B 0 B 0 B > 0 B 0 B 0 0 - host > ceph001.xx002.xx.xx.xx.com > -1 662.71497 - 663 TiB 7.0 TiB 102 MiB 37 KiB 1.7 > GiB 656 TiB 1.05 1.00 - root default > -9 662.71497 - 663 TiB 7.0 TiB 102 MiB 37 KiB 1.7 > GiB 656 TiB 1.05 1.00 - host ceph001 > 36 index_nvme 0.87329 1.00000 894 GiB 33 MiB 2.7 MiB 1 KiB 30 > MiB 894 GiB 0.00 0.00 0 up osd.36 > 0 object_hdd 18.38449 1.00000 18 TiB 199 GiB 2.7 MiB 1 KiB 56 > MiB 18 TiB 1.06 1.00 0 up osd.0 > 1 object_hdd 18.38449 1.00000 18 TiB 199 GiB 2.7 MiB 1 KiB 74 > MiB 18 TiB 1.06 1.00 0 up osd.1 > 2 object_hdd 18.38449 1.00000 18 TiB 199 GiB 2.7 MiB 1 KiB 56 > MiB 18 TiB 1.06 1.00 0 up osd.2 > > This looks like a bug, but I'm not sure, maybe someone has encountered > something similar? > > Regards, > Piotr > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx > -- Łukasz Borek lukasz@xxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx