Hi,
thanks for this clarification.
I'm running a 7-node-cluster and this risk should be managable.
Am 16.03.2020 um 16:57 schrieb Anthony D'Atri:
He means that if eg. you enforce 1 copy of a PG per
rack, that any upmaps you enter don’t result in 2 or 3 in the same rack. If your CRUSH
poilicy is one copy per *host* the danger is even higher that you could have data become
unavailable or even lost in case of a failure.
> On Mar 16, 2020, at 7:45 AM, Thomas Schneider <74cmonty(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Wido,
>
> can you please share some detailed instructions how to do this?
> And what do you mean with "respect your failure domain"?
>
> THX
>
> Am 04.03.2020 um 11:27 schrieb Wido den Hollander:
>> On 3/4/20 11:15 AM, Thomas Schneider wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Ceph balancer is not working correctly; there's an open bug
>>> <https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/43752> report, too.
>>>
>>> Until this issue is not solved, I need a workaround because I get more
>>> and more warnings about "nearfull osd(s)".
>>>
>>> Therefore my question is:
>>> How can I forcibly move PGs from full OSD to empty OSD?
>> Yes, you could manually create upmap items to map PGs to a specific OSD
>> and offload another one.
>>
>> This is what the balancer also does. Keep in mind though that you should
>> respect your failure domain (host, rack, etc) when creating these mappings.
>>
>> Wido
>>
>>> THX
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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