- ceph-users - lists.ceph.io

What is a pgmap?
by Bryan Henderson 20 May '20

20 May '20

I'm surprised I couldn't find this explained anywhere (I did look), but ... What is the pgmap and why does it get updated every few seconds on a tiny cluster that's mostly idle? I do know what a placement group (PG) is and that when documentation talks about placement group maps, it is talking about something else -- mapping of PGs to OSDs by CRUSH and OSD maps. -- Bryan Henderson San Jose, California

4 6

Ceph Dashboard suddenly gone and primary remote is not accessible [CEPHADM_HOST_CHECK_FAILED, CEPHADM_REFRESH_FAILED]
by Gencer W. Genç 20 May '20

20 May '20

Hi, I was browsing dashboard today. Then suddently it stopped working and i got 502 errors. I checked via root login and see thet ceph health is down to WARN. I can access all rdb devices and CephFS. They work. All OSDs in server-1 is up. health: HEALTH_WARN 1 hosts fail cephadm check failed to probe daemons or devices I even restarted server-1. No luck. I'm on server-1. cephadm complains it cannot access to server-1. In basic term, server-1 cannot access server-1 (192.168.0.1) server-1: 192.168.0.1 server-2: 192.168.0.3 $ ssh -F =(ceph cephadm get-ssh-config) -i =(ceph config-key get mgr/cephadm/ssh_identity_key) root@server-1 > Success. cephadm says server-1 is not reachable. Why cephadm/ceph complain about this and what happend to my dashboard? I also redirected logs to file. I'm observing for any weird log input but unfortunately nothing helpful. Where should I look for? What am i missing? So, when I ran this command: $ ceph health detail Output was: HEALTH_WARN 1 hosts fail cephadm check; failed to probe daemons or devices [WRN] CEPHADM_HOST_CHECK_FAILED: 1 hosts fail cephadm check host server-1 failed check: Failed to connect to server-1 (server-1). Check that the host is reachable and accepts connections using the cephadm SSH key you may want to run: > ssh -F =(ceph cephadm get-ssh-config) -i =(ceph config-key get mgr/cephadm/ssh_identity_key) root@server-1 [WRN] CEPHADM_REFRESH_FAILED: failed to probe daemons or devices host server-1 scrape failed: Failed to connect to server-1 (server-1). Check that the host is reachable and accepts connections using the cephadm SSH key you may want to run: > ssh -F =(ceph cephadm get-ssh-config) -i =(ceph config-key get mgr/cephadm/ssh_identity_key) root@server-1 host server-1 ceph-volume inventory failed: Failed to connect to server-1 (server-1). Check that the host is reachable and accepts connections using the cephadm SSH key you may want to run: > ssh -F =(ceph cephadm get-ssh-config) -i =(ceph config-key get mgr/cephadm/ssh_identity_key) root@server-1 Thanks, Gencer.

2 2

Clarification of documentation
by CodingSpiderFox 20 May '20

20 May '20

In the docs: https://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/radosgw/multisite/ - in the section Requirements and Assumptions There is this warning hint: "Running a single Ceph storage cluster is NOT recommended unless you have low latency WAN connections." What exactly does "single Ceph storage cluster" mean? * Just having one site? * Do I need to run multiple independent clusters across a number of n sites before I can do multi-site - so it would not be possible to start with one site and add further sites step by step? And what exactly happens with higher latency WAN connections?

6 10

Re: Zeroing out rbd image or volume
by Jason Dillaman 19 May '20

19 May '20

I would also like to add that the OSDs can (and will) use redirect on write techniques (not to mention the physical device hardware as well). Therefore, your zeroing of the device might just cause the OSDs to allocate new extents of zeros while the old extents remain intact (albeit unreferenced and available for future writes). The correct solution would be to layer LUKS/dm-crypt on top of the RBD device if you need a strong security guarantee about a specific image, or use encrypted OSDs if the concern is about the loss of the OSD physical device. On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 6:58 AM Marc Roos <M.Roos(a)f1-outsourcing.eu> wrote: > > dd if=/dev/zero of=rbd ???? :) but if you have encrypted osd's, what > would be the use of this? > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: huxiaoyu(a)horebdata.cn [mailto:huxiaoyu@horebdata.cn] > Sent: 12 May 2020 12:55 > To: ceph-users > Subject: [ceph-users] Zeroing out rbd image or volume > > Hi， Ceph folks, > > Is there a rbd command, or any other way, to zero out rbd images or > volume? I would like to write all zero data to an rbd image/volume > before remove it. > > Any comments would be appreciated. > > best regards, > > samuel > Horebdata AG > Switzerland > > > > > huxiaoyu(a)horebdata.cn > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users(a)ceph.io To unsubscribe send an > email to ceph-users-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 > -- Jason

5 4

Re: v15.2.2 Octopus released
by David Orman 19 May '20

19 May '20

The updated images have not been pushed to Dockerhub yet. I ran into the same problem yesterday trying to update. Hopefully updated images will be pushed on release (at the same time as the tarball release/prior to announcement) moving forward in order to avoid this issue. See here for latest tags: https://hub.docker.com/r/ceph/ceph/tags

1 0

Resources for multisite deployment
by Coding SpiderFox 19 May '20

19 May '20

Hello everyone, I'd like to setup a multisite ceph cluster. Are there any sample setups that you can recommend studying? I want to achieve fault tolerance but also I want to avoid split brain scenarios. I'm not that familiar with systems like ceph, so I would consider myself as a beginner. Thank you and have a great day

1 0

v15.2.2 Octopus released
by Abhishek Lekshmanan 19 May '20

19 May '20

We're happy to announce the second bugfix release of Ceph Octopus stable release series, we recommend that all Octopus users upgrade. This release has a range of fixes across all components and a security fix. Notable Changes --------------- * CVE-2020-10736: Fixed an authorization bypass in mons & mgrs (Olle SegerDahl, Josh Durgin) For the complete changelog please refer to the full release blog at https://ceph.io/releases/v15-2-2-octopus-released/ Getting Ceph ------------ * Git at git://github.com/ceph/ceph.git * Tarball at http://download.ceph.com/tarballs/ceph-15.2.2.tar.gz * For packages, see http://docs.ceph.com/docs/master/install/get-packages/ * Release git sha1: 0c857e985a29d90501a285f242ea9c008df49eb8 -- Abhishek Lekshmanan SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH GF: Felix Imendörffer, HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg)

2 1

nfs migrate to rgw
by Zhenshi Zhou 19 May '20

19 May '20

Hi all, We have several nfs servers providing file storage. There is a nginx in front of nfs servers in order to serve the clients. The files are mostly small files and nearly about 30TB in total. I'm gonna use ceph rgw as the storage. I wanna know if it's appropriate to do so. The data migrating from nfs to rgw is a huge job. Besides I'm not sure whether ceph rgw is suitable in this scenario or not. Thanks

3 5

Re: Dealing with non existing crush-root= after reclassify on ec pools
by Dan 19 May '20

19 May '20

I think I did a bad job explaining my issue: I have a fairly old cluster which had a crush map with two trees, one for hdds and one for ssd, like root hdd {..} and root ssd {...} now with the newer class based rules I used crushtool —reclassify to merge those two trees into root default {...} So I already downloaded, edited and Reuploaded the crush map, which resulted in a very minor data movement, which crushtool —compare predicted. One of my pools is an ec pool with an ec profile with crush-root=hdd. I can not, I think, change the ec-profile of an existing pool. But since the pool runs on that profile, with the now non existing crush-root=hdd, I am wondering if I can expect to run into trouble down the line or does the cluster use some internal id, and the string displayed only matters on creation. Basically am I safe or am I hosed? On Mon 18. May 2020 at 19:05, Eric Smith <Eric.Smith(a)vecima.com> wrote: > You'll probably have to decompile, hand edit, recompile, and reset the > crush map pointing at the expected root. The EC profile is only used during > pool creation and will not change the crush map if you change the EC > profile. I think you can expect some data movement if you change the root > but either way I would test it in a lab if you have one available. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan <dan34567(a)gmail.com> On Behalf Of Dan > Sent: Monday, May 18, 2020 9:14 AM > To: ceph-users(a)ceph.io > Subject: [ceph-users] Dealing with non existing crush-root= after > reclassify on ec pools > > I have reclassified a CRUSH map, using the crushtool to a class based > ruleset. > I still have an ec pool with an older ec profile with a new non existing > crush-root=hdd > > I already switched the pool’s ruleset over to a newer rule with a newer > ec-profile with a correct crush-root But pool ls detail still shows: > > > pool 9 'data' erasure profile jerasure-3-1 size 4 min_size 3 ….. > > Jerasure-3-1 being the old profile with non existing crush-root > > So what do I do now? Switching over the pool ruleset does not change the > ec-profile, can I switch the ec-profile over? > What can I expect having a pool with a ec-profile with a non existing > crush-root key? > > Please advise. > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users(a)ceph.io To unsubscribe send an > email to ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io >

2 1

feature mask: why not use HAVE_FEATURE macro in Connection::has_feature()?
by Xinying Song 18 May '20

18 May '20

Hi, everyone: Why don't we use HAVE_FEATURE macro in Connection::has_feature()? Do the features in a Connection not need to care about incarnation things? Missing the macro in Connection is really confusing. Would anyone like to give some explains on this? Thanks!

1 0