Hi, Update to 15.2.5. We have the same issue, in the relase notes they don’t mention anything regarding multisite, but once we updated everything started to work ith 15.2.5. Best regards From: Michael Breen <michael.breen@vikingenterprise.com> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2020 10:40 PM To: ceph-users@ceph.io Subject: [Suspicious newsletter] [ceph-users] Re: Multisite sync not working - permission denied Email received from outside the company. If in doubt don't click links nor open attachments! ________________________________ Continuing my fascinating conversation with myself: The output of radosgw-admin sync status indicates that only the metadata is a problem, i.e., the data itself is syncing, and I have confirmed that. There is no S3 access to the secondary, zone-b, so I could not check replication that way, but having created a bucket on the primary, on the secondary I did rados -p zone-b.rgw.buckets.data ls and saw the bucket had been replicated. My current suspicion is that the user problem is an effect rather than a cause of the metadata sync problem. I have also discovered a setting debug_rgw_sync which increases the debug level only for the sync code, but found nothing interesting. The additional output seemed all to relate to data rather than metadata. On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 at 11:47, Michael Breen <michael.breen@vikingenterprise.com<mailto:michael.breen@vikingenterprise.com>> wrote: I forgot to mention earlier attempted debugging: I believe this is not because the keys are wrong, but because it is looking for a user that is not seen on the secondary: debug 2020-11-03T16:37:47.330+0000 7f32e9859700 5 req 60 0.003999986s :post_period error reading user info, uid=ACCESS can't authenticate debug 2020-11-03T16:37:47.330+0000 7f32e9859700 20 req 60 0.003999986s :post_period rgw::auth::s3::LocalEngine denied with reason=-2028 debug 2020-11-03T16:37:47.330+0000 7f32e9859700 20 req 60 0.003999986s :post_period rgw::auth::s3::AWSAuthStrategy denied with reason=-2028 debug 2020-11-03T16:37:47.330+0000 7f32e9859700 5 req 60 0.003999986s :post_period Failed the auth strategy, reason=-2028 debug 2020-11-03T16:37:47.330+0000 7f32e9859700 10 failed to authorize request src/rgw/rgw_common.h:#define ERR_INVALID_ACCESS_KEY 2028 ./src/rgw/rgw_rest_s3.cc if (rgw_get_user_info_by_access_key(ctl->user, access_key_id, user_info) < 0) { ldpp_dout(dpp, 5) << "error reading user info, uid=" << access_key_id << " can't authenticate" << dendl; On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 at 11:38, Michael Breen <michael.breen@vikingenterprise.com<mailto:michael.breen@vikingenterprise.com>> wrote: Hi, radosgw-admin -v ceph version 15.2.4 (7447c15c6ff58d7fce91843b705a268a1917325c) octopus (stable) Multisite sync was something I had working with a previous cluster and an earlier Ceph version, but it doesn't now, and I can't understand why. If anyone with an idea of a possible cause could give me a clue I would be grateful. I have clusters set up using Rook, but as far as I can tell, that's not a factor. On the primary cluster, I have this: radosgw-admin zonegroup get --rgw-zonegroup zonegroup-a { "id": "b115d74a-2d5f-4127-b621-0223f1e96c71", "name": "zonegroup-a", "api_name": "zonegroup-a", "is_master": "true", "endpoints": [ "http://192.168.30.8:80" ], "hostnames": [], "hostnames_s3website": [], "master_zone": "024687e0-1461-4f45-9149-9e571791c2b3", "zones": [ { "id": "024687e0-1461-4f45-9149-9e571791c2b3", "name": "zone-a", "endpoints": [ "http://192.168.30.8:80" ], "log_meta": "false", "log_data": "true", "bucket_index_max_shards": 11, "read_only": "false", "tier_type": "", "sync_from_all": "true", "sync_from": [], "redirect_zone": "" }, { "id": "6ba0ee26-0155-48f9-b057-2803336f0d66", "name": "zone-b", "endpoints": [ "http://192.168.30.108:80" ], "log_meta": "false", "log_data": "true", "bucket_index_max_shards": 11, "read_only": "false", "tier_type": "", "sync_from_all": "true", "sync_from": [], "redirect_zone": "" } ], "placement_targets": [ { "name": "default-placement", "tags": [], "storage_classes": [ "STANDARD" ] } ], "default_placement": "default-placement", "realm_id": "8c38fa05-c19d-4e30-bc98-e2bc84eccb68", "sync_policy": { "groups": [] } } It's identical on the secondary (that's after a realm pull, an update of the zone-b endpoints, and a period commit), which I double-checked by piping the output to md5sum on both sides. The system user created on the primary is radosgw-admin user info --uid realm-a-system-user { ... "keys": [ { "user": "realm-a-system-user", "access_key": "IUs+USI5IjA8WkZPRjU=", "secret_key": "PGRDSzRERD4lbF9AYThuLzkvW1QvL148Q147PA==" } ... } The zones on both sides have these keys radosgw-admin zone get --rgw-zone zone-a { ... "system_key": { "access_key": "IUs+USI5IjA8WkZPRjU=", "secret_key": "PGRDSzRERD4lbF9AYThuLzkvW1QvL148Q147PA==" }, ... } radosgw-admin zone get --rgw-zonegroup zonegroup-a --rgw-zone zone-b { ... "system_key": { "access_key": "IUs+USI5IjA8WkZPRjU=", "secret_key": "PGRDSzRERD4lbF9AYThuLzkvW1QvL148Q147PA==" }, ... } Yet, on the secondary radosgw-admin sync status realm 8c38fa05-c19d-4e30-bc98-e2bc84eccb68 (realm-a) zonegroup b115d74a-2d5f-4127-b621-0223f1e96c71 (zonegroup-a) zone 6ba0ee26-0155-48f9-b057-2803336f0d66 (zone-b) metadata sync preparing for full sync full sync: 64/64 shards full sync: 0 entries to sync incremental sync: 0/64 shards metadata is behind on 64 shards behind shards: [0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63] data sync source: 024687e0-1461-4f45-9149-9e571791c2b3 (zone-a) syncing full sync: 0/128 shards incremental sync: 128/128 shards data is caught up with source and on the primary radosgw-admin sync status realm 8c38fa05-c19d-4e30-bc98-e2bc84eccb68 (realm-a) zonegroup b115d74a-2d5f-4127-b621-0223f1e96c71 (zonegroup-a) zone 024687e0-1461-4f45-9149-9e571791c2b3 (zone-a) metadata sync no sync (zone is master) 2020-11-06T10:58:46.345+0000 7fa805c201c0 0 data sync zone:6ba0ee26 ERROR: failed to fetch datalog info data sync source: 6ba0ee26-0155-48f9-b057-2803336f0d66 (zone-b) failed to retrieve sync info: (13) Permission denied Given that all the keys above match, that "permission denied" is a mystery to me, but it does accord with: export AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID="IUs+USI5IjA8WkZPRjU=" export AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY="PGRDSzRERD4lbF9AYThuLzkvW1QvL148Q147PA==" s3cmd ls --no-ssl --host-bucket= --host=192.168.30.8 # OK, but: s3cmd ls --no-ssl --host-bucket= --host=192.168.30.108 # ERROR: S3 error: 403 (InvalidAccessKeyId) # Although curl -L http://192.168.30.108 # works: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8 ... 192.168.30.108 is the external IP, but just to be certain I was hitting zone-b, I tried this also within the cluster using its internal IP s3cmd ls --no-ssl --host-bucket= --host=10.41.157.115 # ERROR: S3 error: 403 (InvalidAccessKeyId) This seems to be the reason it's not syncing, but why? The user with those keys existed on the primary before the realm pull, in agreement with every procedure I have seen for setting up multisite. Any suggestions? Regards, Michael CONFIDENTIALITY This e-mail message and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail message, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail message, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail message in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copies of this email and any prints thereof. ABSENT AN EXPRESS STATEMENT TO THE CONTRARY HEREINABOVE, THIS E-MAIL IS NOT INTENDED AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR A WRITING. Notwithstanding the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act or the applicability of any other law of similar substance and effect, absent an express statement to the contrary hereinabove, this e-mail message its contents, and any attachments hereto are not intended to represent an offer or acceptance to enter into a contract and are not otherwise intended to bind the sender, Sanmina Corporation (or any of its subsidiaries), or any other person or entity. ________________________________ This message is confidential and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). It may also be privileged or otherwise protected by copyright or other legal rules. If you have received it by mistake please let us know by reply email and delete it from your system. It is prohibited to copy this message or disclose its content to anyone. Any confidentiality or privilege is not waived or lost by any mistaken delivery or unauthorized disclosure of the message. All messages sent to and from Agoda may be monitored to ensure compliance with company policies, to protect the company's interests and to remove potential malware. Electronic messages may be intercepted, amended, lost or deleted, or contain viruses.