- ceph-users - lists.ceph.io

Re: CFP closing soon: Everything Open 2024 (Gladstone, Queensland, Australia, April 16-18)
by Tim Serong 20 Nov '23

20 Nov '23

Update: the CFP has been extended 'til November 30 (see http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/eo-announce/2023-November/000011.html) On 11/17/23 14:09, Tim Serong wrote: > Everything Open (auspiced by Linux Australia) is happening again in > 2024. The CFP closes at the end of this weekend (November 19): > > https://2024.everythingopen.au/programme/proposals/ > > More details below. > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2023 09:16:31 +1000 > From: Everything Open <contact(a)everythingopen.au> > To: eo-announce(a)lists.linux.org.au, announce(a)lists.linux.org.au > Subject: [Announce] Everything Open 2024: Call for Sessions Now Open > User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.1.1 > > Submit your session proposals today - the Everything Open 2024 Call for > Sessions is now open. > > > ## Call for Sessions > > We invite you to submit a session proposal on a topic you are familiar > with via our proposals portal at > https://2024.everythingopen.au/programme/proposals/. > The Call for Sessions will remain open until 11:59pm on Sunday 19 > November 2023 anywhere on earth (AoE). > > There will be multiple streams catering for a wide range of interest > areas across the many facets of open technology, including Linux, open > source software, open hardware, standards, formats and documentation, > and our communities. > In keeping with the conference’s aim to be inclusive to all community > members, presentations can be aimed at any level, ranging from technical > deep-dives through to beginner and intermediate level presentations for > those who are newer to the subject. > > There will be two types of sessions at Everything Open: talks and > tutorials. Talks will nominally be 45 minutes long on a single topic > presented in lecture format. We will also have a few short talk slots of > 25 minutes available, which are perfect for people new to presenting at > a conference. Tutorials are interactive and hands-on in nature, > presented in classroom format. > Each accepted session will receive one Professional level ticket to > attend the conference. > > The Session Selection Committee is looking forward to reading your > submissions. We would also like to thank them for coming together and > volunteering their time to help put this conference together. > > > ## Sponsor Early > > As usual, we have a range of sponsorship opportunities available, for > the conference overall as well as the ability to contribute towards > specific parts of the event. > We encourage you to sponsor the conference early, to get the maximum > promotion during the lead up to the event. > If you or your organisation is interested in sponsoring Everything Open, > please get in touch via > https://2024.everythingopen.au/sponsors/prospectus/. > > ---- > Read this online at > https://2024.everythingopen.au/news/call-for-sessions-open/ > > > _______________________________________________ > announce mailing list > announce(a)lists.linux.org.au > http://lists.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/announce > > ----- End forwarded message ----- > _______________________________________________ > Dev mailing list -- dev(a)ceph.io > To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave(a)ceph.io

1 0

Why is min_size of erasure pools set to k+1
by Vladimir Brik 20 Nov '23

20 Nov '23

Could someone help me understand why it's a bad idea to set min_size of erasure-coded pools to k? From what I've read, the argument for k+1 is that if min_size is k and you lose an OSD during recovery after a failure of m OSDs, data will become unavailable. But how does setting min_size to k+1 help? If m=2, if you experience a double failure followed by another failure during recovery you still lost 3 OSDs and therefore your data because the pool wasn't set up to handle 3 concurrent failures, and the value of min_size is irrelevant. https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/8008 mentions inability to peer if min_size = k, but I don't understand why. Does that mean that if min_size=k and I lose m OSDs, and then an OSD is restarted during recovery, PGs will not peer even after the restarted OSD comes back online? Vlad

2 1

Re: Bug fixes in 17.2.7
by Konstantin Shalygin 20 Nov '23

20 Nov '23

Hi, > On Nov 20, 2023, at 19:24, Tobias Kulschewski <T.Kulschewski(a)uni-bonn.de> wrote: > > do you have a rough estimate of when this will happen? > > Not at this year I think. For now precedence for a 18.2.1 and last release of Pacific But you can request shaman build, and clone repo for your local usage k

1 0

Bug fixes in 17.2.7
by Tobias Kulschewski 20 Nov '23

20 Nov '23

Hi guys, thank you for releasing 17.2.7! Just wanted to ask, if the bug with the multipart upload [1] has been fixed in 17.2.7? When are you planning on fixing this bug? Best, Tobias [1] https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/58879_

2 1

blustore osd nearfull but no pgs on it
by Debian 20 Nov '23

20 Nov '23

Hi, after a massive rebalance(tunables) my small SSD-OSDs are getting full, i changed my crush rules so there are actual no pgs/pools on it, but the disks stay full: ceph version 14.2.21 (5ef401921d7a88aea18ec7558f7f9374ebd8f5a6) nautilus (stable) ID CLASS WEIGHT REWEIGHT SIZE RAW USE DATA OMAP META AVAIL %USE VAR PGS STATUS TYPE NAME 158 ssd 0.21999 1.00000 224 GiB 194 GiB 193 GiB 22 MiB 1002 MiB 30 GiB 86.68 1.49 0 up osd.158 inferring bluefs devices from bluestore path 1 : device size 0x37e4400000 : own 0x[1ad3f00000~23c600000] = 0x23c600000 : using 0x39630000(918 MiB) : bluestore has 0x46e2d0000(18 GiB) available when i recreate the osd the osd gets full again any suggestion? thx & best regards

5 11

304 response is not RFC9110 compliant
by Ondřej Kukla 20 Nov '23

20 Nov '23

Hello, I’ve noticed that 304 response from s3 and s3website api is not RFC9110 compliant. This is an issue especially for caching the content when you have a cache-control header set on the object. There was an old Issue and PR from 2020 fixing this issue but it was completely ignored. I’ve created a new issue so it will be able to get back to it. https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/63507 Regards, Ondrej

1 0

Rgw object deletion
by mahnoosh shahidi 20 Nov '23

20 Nov '23

Hi everyone, In a pacific cluster, deleting S3 objects finish successfully but the deleted objects still exist in the bucket list and we can delete them over again without any error. Apparently object deletion does not update bucket index data. The behaviour happens randomly in different buckets. This can be fixed by* radosgw-admin bucket check --fix --check-objects *command. Any idea why this is happening? and how can I fix it? Best Regards, Mahnoosh

2 1

Re: reef 18.2.1 QE Validation status
by Redouane Kachach 17 Nov '23

17 Nov '23

Hi Yuri, I've just backported to reef several fixes that I introduced in the last months for the rook orchestrator. Most of them are fixes for dashboard issues/crashes that only happen on Rook environments. The PR [1] has all the changes and it was merged into reef this morning. We really need these changes to be part of the next reef release as the upcoming Rook stable version will be based on it. Please, can you include those changes in the upcoming reef 18.2.1 release? [1] https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/54224 Thanks a lot, Redouane. On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 6:03 PM Yuri Weinstein <yweinste(a)redhat.com> wrote: > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: Venky Shankar <vshankar(a)redhat.com> > Date: Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 11:52 PM > Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Re: reef 18.2.1 QE Validation status > To: Yuri Weinstein <yweinste(a)redhat.com> > Cc: dev <dev(a)ceph.io>, ceph-users <ceph-users(a)ceph.io> > > > Hi Yuri, > > On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 4:55 AM Yuri Weinstein <yweinste(a)redhat.com> > wrote: > > > > I've updated all approvals and merged PRs in the tracker and it looks > > like we are ready for gibba, LRC upgrades pending approval/update from > > Venky. > > The smoke test failure is caused by missing (kclient) patches in > Ubuntu 20.04 that certain parts of the fs suite (via smoke tests) rely > on. More details here > > https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/63488#note-8 > > The kclient tests in smoke pass with other distro's and the fs suite > tests have been reviewed and look good. Run details are here > > https://tracker.ceph.com/projects/cephfs/wiki/Reef#07-Nov-2023 > > The smoke failure is noted as a known issue for now. Consider this run > as "fs approved". > > > > > On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 1:31 PM Radoslaw Zarzynski <rzarzyns(a)redhat.com> > wrote: > > > > > > rados approved! > > > > > > Details are here: > https://tracker.ceph.com/projects/rados/wiki/REEF#1821-Review. > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 10:33 PM Yuri Weinstein <yweinste(a)redhat.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > Details of this release are summarized here: > > > > > > > > https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/63443#note-1 > > > > > > > > Seeking approvals/reviews for: > > > > > > > > smoke - Laura, Radek, Prashant, Venky (POOL_APP_NOT_ENABLE failures) > > > > rados - Neha, Radek, Travis, Ernesto, Adam King > > > > rgw - Casey > > > > fs - Venky > > > > orch - Adam King > > > > rbd - Ilya > > > > krbd - Ilya > > > > upgrade/quincy-x (reef) - Laura PTL > > > > powercycle - Brad > > > > perf-basic - Laura, Prashant (POOL_APP_NOT_ENABLE failures) > > > > > > > > Please reply to this email with approval and/or trackers of known > > > > issues/PRs to address them. > > > > > > > > TIA > > > > YuriW > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Dev mailing list -- dev(a)ceph.io > > > > To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave(a)ceph.io > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users(a)ceph.io > > To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io > > > > -- > Cheers, > Venky > >

7 22

cephadm user on cephadm rpm package
by Luis Domingues 17 Nov '23

17 Nov '23

Hi, I noticed when installing the cephadm rpm package, to bootstrap a cluster for example, that a user cephadm was created. But I do not see it used anywhere. What is the purpose of creating a user on the machine we install the local binary of cephadm? Luis Domingues Proton AG

2 3

blustore osd nearfull but no pgs on it
by Debian 17 Nov '23

17 Nov '23

Hi, after a massive rebalance(tunables) my small SSD-OSDs are getting full, i changed my crush rules so there are actual no pgs/pools on it, but the disks stay full: ceph version 14.2.21 (5ef401921d7a88aea18ec7558f7f9374ebd8f5a6) nautilus (stable) ID CLASS WEIGHT REWEIGHT SIZE RAW USE DATA OMAP META AVAIL %USE VAR PGS STATUS TYPE NAME 158 ssd 0.21999 1.00000 224 GiB 194 GiB 193 GiB 22 MiB 1002 MiB 30 GiB 86.68 1.49 0 up osd.158 inferring bluefs devices from bluestore path 1 : device size 0x37e4400000 : own 0x[1ad3f00000~23c600000] = 0x23c600000 : using 0x39630000(918 MiB) : bluestore has 0x46e2d0000(18 GiB) available when i recreate the osd the osd gets full again any suggestion? thx & best regards

1 0