18 Jul
2020
18 Jul
'20
6:35 a.m.
Hello Community,
I would like to ask about help in explanation situation.
There is Rados gateway with EC pool profile k=6 m=4. So it shoud take
something about 1.4 - 2.0 data usage more from raw data if I’m correct.
Rados df shows me:
116 TiB used and WR 26 TiB
Can You explain this? It is about 4.5*WR used data. Why?
Regards
Mateusz Skała
18 Jul
18 Jul
10:46 a.m.
Can you post the output of a couple of commands:
ceph df
ceph osd pool ls detail
Then we can probably explain the utilization you're seeing.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mateusz Skała <mateusz.skala(a)gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2020 1:35 AM
To: ceph-users(a)ceph.io
Subject: [ceph-users] EC profile datastore usage - question
Hello Community,
I would like to ask about help in explanation situation.
There is Rados gateway with EC pool profile k=6 m=4. So it shoud take something about 1.4
- 2.0 data usage more from raw data if I’m correct.
Rados df shows me:
116 TiB used and WR 26 TiB
Can You explain this? It is about 4.5*WR used data. Why?
Regards
Mateusz Skała
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users(a)ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to
ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io
20 Jul
20 Jul
2:05 p.m.
Hi Mateusz,
I think you might be hit by:
https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/44213
This is fixed in upcoming Pacific release. Nautilus/Octopus backport is
under discussion for now.
Thanks,
Igor
On 7/18/2020 8:35 AM, Mateusz Skała wrote:
> Hello Community,
> I would like to ask about help in explanation situation.
> There is Rados gateway with EC pool profile k=6 m=4. So it shoud take
> something about 1.4 - 2.0 data usage more from raw data if I’m correct.
> Rados df shows me:
> 116 TiB used and WR 26 TiB
> Can You explain this? It is about 4.5*WR used data. Why?
> Regards
> Mateusz Skała
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users(a)ceph.io
> To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io
5:02 p.m.
Hi Igor,
Given the patch histories and the rejection of the previous patch for the
one in favor of defaulting to 4k block size, does this essentially mean
ceph does not support higher block sizes when using erasure coding? Will
the ceph project be updating their documentation and references to let
everyone know that larger blocks don't interact with EC pools as intended?
Sincerely,
On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 9:06 AM Igor Fedotov <ifedotov(a)suse.de> wrote:
Hi Mateusz,
I think you might be hit by:
https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/44213
This is fixed in upcoming Pacific release. Nautilus/Octopus backport is
under discussion for now.
Thanks,
Igor
On 7/18/2020 8:35 AM, Mateusz Skała wrote:
--
Steven Pine
webair.com
*P* 516.938.4100 x
*E * steven.pine(a)webair.com
<https://www.facebook.com/WebairInc/>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/webair>
Hello Community,
I would like to ask about help in explanation situation.
There is Rados gateway with EC pool profile k=6 m=4. So it shoud take
something about 1.4 - 2.0 data usage more from raw data if I’m correct.
Rados df shows me:
116 TiB used and WR 26 TiB
Can You explain this? It is about 4.5*WR used data. Why?
Regards
Mateusz Skała
_______________________________________________
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
21 Jul
21 Jul
12:54 p.m.
Hi Steven,
IMO your statement about "not supporting higher block sizes" is too
strong. From my experience excessive space usage for EC pools tend to
depend on write access pattern, input block sizes and/or object sizes.
Hence I'm pretty sure this issue isn't present/visible for every cluster
with alloc size > 4K and EC pool enabled. E.g. one wouldn't notice it
when the majority of objects are large enough and/or written just once.
But honestly I haven't performed that comprehensive investigation on the
topic.
And perhaps you're right and we should cover the issue in the
documentation. Please feel free to fire corresponding ticket in Ceph
tracker...
Thanks,
Igor
On 7/20/2020 7:02 PM, Steven Pine wrote:
Hi Igor,
Given the patch histories and the rejection of the previous patch for
the one in favor of defaulting to 4k block size, does this essentially
mean ceph does not support higher block sizes when using erasure
coding? Will the ceph project be updating their documentation and
references to let everyone know that larger blocks don't interact with
EC pools as intended?
Sincerely,
On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 9:06 AM Igor Fedotov <ifedotov(a)suse.de
<mailto:ifedotov@suse.de>> wrote:
Hi Mateusz,
I think you might be hit by:
https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/44213
This is fixed in upcoming Pacific release. Nautilus/Octopus
backport is
under discussion for now.
Thanks,
Igor
On 7/18/2020 8:35 AM, Mateusz Skała wrote:
Hello Community,
I would like to ask about help in explanation situation.
There is Rados gateway with EC pool profile k=6 m=4. So it shoud
take
something about 1.4 - 2.0 data usage more from
raw data if I’m
correct.
Rados df shows me:
116 TiB used and WR 26 TiB
Can You explain this? It is about 4.5*WR used data. Why?
Regards
Mateusz Skała
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users(a)ceph.io
<mailto:ceph-users@ceph.io>
To unsubscribe send an email to
ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io
<mailto:ceph-users-leave@ceph.io>
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users(a)ceph.io
<mailto:ceph-users@ceph.io>
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave(a)ceph.io
<mailto:ceph-users-leave@ceph.io>
--
Steven Pine
webair.com <http://webair.com>
*P* 516.938.4100 x
*E * steven.pine(a)webair.com <mailto:steven.pine@webair.com>
<https://www.facebook.com/WebairInc/>
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/webair>
1397
days inactive
1400
days old
4 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Eric Smith -
Igor Fedotov -
Mateusz Skała -
Steven Pine