Hi,
Thanks Anthony - as always a very useful and comprehensive response
yes, there were only 139 OSD and , indeed, raw capacity increased
I also noticed that the "max available " column from "cepf df" is getting
higher (177 TB) so, it seems the capacity is being added
The drives used in the SSD_class are 7TB Micron_5400
The failed daemon is the manager - will follow your advice and add one more
Blue_store warning was set to 600 - will change it to 300
Too many MDS daemons are due to the fact that I have over 150 CEPHFS clients
and thought that deploying a daemon on each host for each filesystem is
going to
provide better performance - was I wrong ?
High number of remapped PGs are due to improperly using
osd.all-available-devices unmaged command
so adding the new drives triggered automatically detecting and adding them
I am not sure what I did wrong though - see below output from "ceph orch
ls" before adding the drive
Shouldn't setting it like that prevent automatic discovery ?
NAME PORTS RUNNING REFRESHED
AGE PLACEMENT
alertmanager ?:9093,9094 1/1 7m ago
5w count:1
ceph-exporter 7/7 10m ago
5w *
crash 7/7 10m ago
5w *
grafana ?:3001 1/1 7m ago
4w count:1
ingress.rgw.default.default 192.168.122.239:1969,8080 4/4 10m ago
4w ceph-host-4;ceph-host-5
loki ?:3100 1/1 7m ago
4w ceph-host-2;count:1
mds.hdd_ec_archive 5/5 10m ago
5w ceph-host-1;ceph-host-5;ceph-host-4;ceph-host-6;ceph-host-7;count:5
mds.project_ec_ssd 7/7 10m ago
4w
ceph-host-1;ceph-host-2;ceph-host-3;ceph-host-4;ceph-host-5;ceph-host-6;ceph-host-7;count:7
mds.projects_rep_nvme 7/7 10m ago
4w
ceph-host-1;ceph-host-2;ceph-host-3;ceph-host-4;ceph-host-5;ceph-host-6;ceph-host-7;count:7
mds.projects_rep_ssd 7/7 10m ago
4w
ceph-host-1;ceph-host-2;ceph-host-3;ceph-host-4;ceph-host-5;ceph-host-6;ceph-host-7;count:7
mgr 2/2 7m ago
5w count:2
mon 5/5 8m ago
5w count:5
node-exporter ?:9100 7/7 10m ago
5w *
osd.all-available-devices 0 -
4w <unmanaged>
osd.hdd_osds 72 10m ago
5w *
osd.nvme_osds 25 10m ago
5w *
osd.ssd_osds 84 10m ago
3w ceph-host-1
prometheus ?:9095 1/1 7m ago
5w count:1
promtail ?:9080 7/7 10m ago
4w
ceph-host-1;ceph-host-2;ceph-host-3;ceph-host-4;ceph-host-5;ceph-host-6;ceph-host-7;count:7
rgw.default.default ?:80 0/2 10m ago
4w count-per-host:1;label:rgw
0.090000
{
"active": true,
Resources mentioned are very useful
running upmap-remapped.py did bring the number of PGs to be remapped close
to zero
Just wanted to clarify the steps needed because , doing it like below,
I am , eventually, ending up again with lots of unmapped PGs and with an
"unhappy" balancer
1. # ceph osd set norebalance
# ceph balancer off
2. upmap-remapped.py | sh
3. change target_max_misplaced_ratio to a higher number than default 0.005
(since we want to rebalance faster and client performance is not a huge
issue )
4. enable balancer
5.wait
Doing it like this will, eventually, increase the number misplaced PGs
until it is higher than the ratio when , I guess, the balancer stops
( "optimize_result": "Too many objects (0.115742 > 0.090000) are
misplaced; try again later )
Should I repeat the process when the number of objects misplaced is higher
than the ratio or what is the proper way of doing it ?
Steven
On Sun, 31 Aug 2025 at 11:08, Anthony D'Atri <aad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 31, 2025, at 4:15 AM, Steven Vacaroaia <stef97@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have added 42 x 18TB HDD disks ( 6 on each of the 7 servers )
>
>
> The ultimate answer to Ceph, the cluster, and everything!
>
> My expectation was that the pools configured to use "hdd_class" will
> have their capacity increased ( e.g. default.rgw.buckets.data which is
> uses an EC 4+2 pool for data )
>
>
> First, did the raw capacity increase when you added these drives?
>
> --- RAW STORAGE ---
> CLASS SIZE AVAIL USED RAW USED %RAW USED
> hdd_class 1.4 PiB 814 TiB 579 TiB 579 TiB 41.54
>
>
> Was the number of OSDs previously 139?
>
> It seems it is not happening ...yet ?!
> Is it because the peering is still going ?
>
>
> Ceph nomenclature can be mystifying at first. And sometimes at thirteenth.
>
> Peering is daemons checking in with each other to ensure they’re in
> agreement.
>
> I think you mean backfill / balancing.
>
> The available space reported by “ceph df” for a *pool* is a function of:
>
> * Raw space available in the associated CRUSH rule’s device class (or if
> the rule isn’t ideal, all device classes)
> * The cluster’s three full ratios # ceph osd dump | grep ratio
> * The fullness of the single most-full OSD in the device class
>
> BTW I learned only yesterday that you can restrict `ceph osd df` by
> specifying a device class, so try running
>
> `ceph osd df hdd_class | tail -10`
>
> Notably, this will show you the min/max variance among OSDs of just that
> device class, and the standard deviation.
> When you have multiple OSD sizes, these figures are much less useful when
> calculated across the whole cluster by “ceph osd df”
>
> # ceph osd df hdd
> ...
> 318 hdd 18.53969 1.00000 19 TiB 15 TiB 15 TiB 15 KiB 67 GiB
> 3.6 TiB 80.79 1.04 127 up
> 319 hdd 18.53969 1.00000 19 TiB 15 TiB 14 TiB 936 KiB 60 GiB
> 3.7 TiB 79.87 1.03 129 up
> 320 hdd 18.53969 1.00000 19 TiB 15 TiB 14 TiB 33 KiB 72 GiB
> 3.7 TiB 79.99 1.03 129 up
> 30 hdd 18.53969 1.00000 19 TiB 3.3 TiB 2.9 TiB 129 KiB 11
> GiB 15 TiB 17.55 0.23 26 up
> TOTAL 5.4 PiB 4.2 PiB 4.1 PiB 186 MiB 17 TiB
> 1.2 PiB 77.81
> MIN/MAX VAR: 0.23/1.09 STDDEV: 4.39
>
> You can even run this for a specific OSD so you don’t have to get creative
> with an egrep regex or exercise your pattern-matching skills, though the
> summary values naturally aren’t useful.
>
> # ceph osd df osd.30
> ID CLASS WEIGHT REWEIGHT SIZE RAW USE DATA OMAP META
> AVAIL %USE VAR PGS STATUS
> 30 hdd 18.53969 1.00000 19 TiB 3.3 TiB 2.9 TiB 129 KiB 12 GiB
> 15 TiB 17.55 1.00 26 up
> TOTAL 19 TiB 3.3 TiB 2.9 TiB 130 KiB 12 GiB
> 15 TiB 17.55
> MIN/MAX VAR: 1.00/1.00 STDDEV: 0
>
> Here there’s a wide variation among the hdd OSDs because osd.30 had been
> down for a while and was recently restarted due to a host reboot, so it’s
> slowly filling with data.
>
>
> ssd_class 6.98630
>
>
> That seems like an unusual size, what are these? Are they SAN LUNs?
>
> Below are outputs from
> ceph -s
> ceph df
> ceph osd df tree
>
>
> Thanks for providing the needful up front.
>
> cluster:
> id: 0cfa836d-68b5-11f0-90bf-7cc2558e5ce8
> health: HEALTH_WARN
> 1 OSD(s) experiencing slow operations in BlueStore
>
>
> This warning state by default persists for a long time after it clears,
> I’m not sure why but I like to set this lower:
>
> # ceph config dump | grep blue
> global advanced
> bluestore_slow_ops_warn_lifetime 300
>
>
>
> 1 failed cephadm daemon(s)
>
> 39 daemons have recently crashed
>
>
> That’s a bit worrisome, what happened?
>
> `ceph crash ls`
>
>
> 569 pgs not deep-scrubbed in time
> 2609 pgs not scrubbed in time
>
>
> Scrubs don’t happen during recovery, when complete these should catch up.
>
> services:
> mon: 5 daemons, quorum
> ceph-host-1,ceph-host-2,ceph-host-3,ceph-host-7,ceph-host-6 (age 2m)
> mgr: ceph-host-1.lqlece(active, since 18h), standbys: ceph-host-2.suiuxi
>
>
> I’m paranoid and would suggest deploying at least one more mgr.
>
> mds: 19/19 daemons up, 7 standby
>
>
> Yikes why so many?
>
> osd: 181 osds: 181 up (since 4d), 181 in (since 14h)
>
>
> What happened 14 hours ago? It seems unusual for these durations to vary
> so much.
>
> 2770 remapped pgs
>
>
> That’s an indication of balancing or backfill in progress.
>
> flags noautoscale
>
> data:
> volumes: 4/4 healthy
> pools: 16 pools, 7137 pgs
> objects: 256.82M objects, 484 TiB
> usage: 742 TiB used, 1.5 PiB / 2.2 PiB avail
> pgs: 575889786/1468742421 objects misplaced (39.210%)
>
>
> 39% is a lot of misplaced objects, this would be consistent with you
> having successfully added those OSDs.
> Here is where the factor of the most-full OSD comes in.
>
> Technically backfill is a subset of recovery, but in practice people
> usually think in terms:
>
> Recovery: PGs healing from OSDs having failed or been down
> Backfill: Rebalancing of data due to topology changes, including adjusted
> CRUSH rules, expansion, etc.
>
>
> 4247 active+clean
> 2763 active+remapped+backfill_wait
> 77 active+clean+scrubbing
> 43 active+clean+scrubbing+deep
> 7 active+remapped+backfilling
>
>
> Configuration options throttle how much backfill goes on in parallel to
> keep the cluster from DoSing itself. Here I suspect that you’re running a
> recent release with the notorious mclock op scheduling shortcomings, which
> is a tangent.
>
>
> I suggest checking out these two resources re upmap-remapped.py :
>
> https://ceph.io/assets/pdfs/events/2024/ceph-days-nyc/Mastering Ceph
> Operations with Upmap.pdf
>
> https://community.ibm.com/community/user/blogs/anthony-datri/2025/07/30/gracefully-expanding-your-ibm-storage-ceph
>
>
>
> This tool, in conjunction with the balancer module, will do the backfill
> more elegantly with various benefits.
>
>
> --- RAW STORAGE ---
> CLASS SIZE AVAIL USED RAW USED %RAW USED
> hdd_class 1.4 PiB 814 TiB 579 TiB 579 TiB 41.54
>
>
> I hope the formatting below comes through, makes it a lot easier to read a
> table.
>
>
> --- POOLS ---
> POOL ID PGS STORED OBJECTS USED %USED
> MAX AVAIL
> .mgr 1 1 277 MiB 71 831 MiB 0 93
> TiB
> .rgw.root 2 32 1.6 KiB 6 72 KiB 0 93
> TiB
> default.rgw.log 3 32 63 KiB 210 972 KiB 0 93
> TiB
> default.rgw.control 4 32 0 B 8 0 B 0 93
> TiB
> default.rgw.meta 5 32 1.4 KiB 8 72 KiB 0 93
> TiB
> default.rgw.buckets.data 6 2048 289 TiB 100.35M 434 TiB 68.04 136
> TiB
> default.rgw.buckets.index 7 1024 5.4 GiB 521 16 GiB 0 93
> TiB
> default.rgw.buckets.non-ec 8 32 551 B 1 13 KiB 0 93
> TiB
> metadata_fs_ssd 9 128 6.1 GiB 15.69M 18 GiB 0 93
> TiB
> ssd_ec_project 10 1024 108 TiB 44.46M 162 TiB 29.39 260
> TiB
> metadata_fs_hdd 11 128 9.9 GiB 8.38M 30 GiB 0.01 93
> TiB
> hdd_ec_archive 12 1024 90 TiB 87.94M 135 TiB 39.79 136
> TiB
> metadata_fs_nvme 13 32 260 MiB 177 780 MiB 0 93
> TiB
> metadata_fs_ssd_rep 14 32 17 MiB 103 51 MiB 0 93
> TiB
> ssd_rep_projects 15 1024 132 B 1 12 KiB 0 130
> TiB
> nvme_rep_projects 16 512 3.5 KiB 30 336 KiB 093
> TiB
>
>
> Do you have multiple EC RBD pools and/or multiple CephFSes?
>
>
> ID CLASS WEIGHT REWEIGHT SIZE RAW USE DATA OMAP
> META AVAIL %USE VAR PGS STATUS TYPE NAME
> -1 2272.93311 - 2.2 PiB 742 TiB 731 TiB 63 GiB
> 3.1 TiB 1.5 PiB 32.64 1.00 - root default
> -7 254.54175 - 255 TiB 104 TiB 102 TiB 9.6 GiB
> 455 GiB 151 TiB 40.78 1.25 - host ceph-host-1
>
>
> ...
>
>
> 137 hdd_class 18.43300 1.00000 18 TiB 14 TiB 14 TiB 6 KiB
> 50 GiB 4.3 TiB 76.47 2.34 449 up osd.137
> 152 hdd_class 18.19040 1.00000 18 TiB 241 GiB 239 GiB 10 KiB
> 1.8 GiB 18 TiB 1.29 0.04 7 up osd.152
> 3.1 TiB 1.5 PiB 32.64
> MIN/MAX VAR: 0.00/2.46 STDDEV: 26.17
>
>
> There ya go. osd.152 must be one of the new OSDs. Note that only 7 PGs
> are currently resident and that it holds just 4% of the average amount of
> data on the entire set of OSDs.
> Run the focused `osd df` above and that number will change slightly.
>
> Here is your least full hdd_class OSD:
>
> 151 hdd_class 18.19040 1.00000 18 TiB 38 GiB 37 GiB 6 KiB
> 1.1 GiB 18 TiB 0.20 0.01 1 up osd.151
>
> And the most full:
>
> 180 hdd_class 18.19040 1.00000 18 TiB 198 GiB 197 GiB 10 KiB
> 1.7 GiB 18 TiB 1.07 0.03 5 up osd.180
>
>
> I suspect that the most-full is at 107% of average due to the bolus of
> backfill and/or the balancer not being active. Using upmap-remapped as
> described above can help avoid this kind of overload.
>
> In a nutshell, the available space will gradually increase as data is
> backfilled, especially if you have the balancer enabled.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
