Ok, I found an issue
I changed a class when OSD was reweighted then weight for this OSD in this
class was different that default (current) one
And yes - significantly different size caused this problem with degraded
and undersized
Thanks Janne and Wido for help
Jacek
śr., 19 lut 2020 o 10:00 Jacek Suchenia <jacek.suchenia(a)gmail.com>
napisał(a):
Janne
Thanks for good spot however all of them are 3.53830, that change was left
after some tests to kick CRUSH algorithm
Jacek
śr., 19 lut 2020 o 09:47 Janne Johansson <icepic.dz(a)gmail.com> napisał(a):
Den ons 19 feb. 2020 kl 09:42 skrev Jacek
Suchenia <
jacek.suchenia(a)gmail.com>gt;:
Hello Wido
Sure, here is a rule:
-15 s3 3.53830 host kw01sv09.sr1.cr1.lab1~s3
11 s3 3.53830 osd.11
-17 s3 3.53830 host kw01sv10.sr1.cr1.lab1~s3
10 s3 3.53830 osd.10
-16 s3 0.01529 host kw01sv11.sr1.cr1.lab1~s3
0 s3 0.01529 osd.0
The sizes seem _very_ uneven? Perhaps it figures it can't place another
PG on osd.0 due to its tiny size, and hence can't form a decent replica=3
using it, and it can't form one without it either, since you have only
those OSDs.
--
May the most significant bit of your life be positive.
--
Jacek Suchenia
jacek.suchenia(a)gmail.com