Project

General

Profile

Actions

Bug #19497

closed

osd_scrub_sleep option blocks op thread in jewel + later

Added by Josh Durgin about 7 years ago. Updated over 6 years ago.

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
High
Assignee:
Category:
OSD
Target version:
-
% Done:

0%

Source:
Tags:
Backport:
jewel, kraken
Regression:
Yes
Severity:
3 - minor
Reviewed:
Affected Versions:
ceph-qa-suite:
Pull request ID:
Crash signature (v1):
Crash signature (v2):

Description

Just like snap trimming, when scrubbing was moved into the unified op queue, its sleep option was not changed, so it now blocks osd ops rather than just pausing scrubbing.

This sleep should be moved from PG::scrub() into the scrub state machine, and made async, just like it was for snap trimming - see http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/19241


Related issues 2 (0 open2 closed)

Copied to Ceph - Backport #20032: jewel: osd_scrub_sleep option blocks op thread in jewel + laterResolvedBrad HubbardActions
Copied to Ceph - Backport #20033: kraken: osd_scrub_sleep option blocks op thread in jewel + laterResolvedBrad HubbardActions
Actions #1

Updated by Brad Hubbard about 7 years ago

  • Assignee set to Brad Hubbard
Actions #2

Updated by Brad Hubbard almost 7 years ago

  • Status changed from New to In Progress
Actions #3

Updated by Kefu Chai almost 7 years ago

  • Status changed from In Progress to Pending Backport
Actions #4

Updated by Nathan Cutler almost 7 years ago

  • Copied to Backport #20032: jewel: osd_scrub_sleep option blocks op thread in jewel + later added
Actions #5

Updated by Nathan Cutler almost 7 years ago

  • Copied to Backport #20033: kraken: osd_scrub_sleep option blocks op thread in jewel + later added
Actions #7

Updated by Nathan Cutler almost 7 years ago

Brad Hubbard wrote:

Please see https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/15217 also

Brad, are you saying that https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/14886 and https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/15217 should be backported together once the latter has been merged?

Actions #8

Updated by Brad Hubbard almost 7 years ago

Hi Nathan, Yes, https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/14886 causes problems (proliferation of threads) and should not be backported by itself.

Actions #9

Updated by Brad Hubbard almost 7 years ago

https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/15217 has merged and I have set http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/19986 pending backport via this tracker. Hope that's OK?

Actions #10

Updated by Nathan Cutler almost 7 years ago

@Brad - yes, when you open the backport PR, just mention both backport tracker issues in the commit message ;-)

I say "when you open" because I looked at the cherry pick of PR#14886 to jewel. . . and it's non-trivial. It conflicts, e.g., with https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/b7e77996586daa46da6be0bfbb8c2b93e203a83a and I don't know if that's a dependency.

Can I assign the backport trackers to you?

Actions #11

Updated by Brad Hubbard almost 7 years ago

@Nathan Weinberg, Yes mate, please do and I'll see what I can do about it. b7e77996586daa46da6be0bfbb8c2b93e203a83a shouldn't be a dependency but it's also my code so I'm definitely best placed to do the work :)

Actions #12

Updated by Nathan Cutler over 6 years ago

  • Status changed from Pending Backport to Resolved
Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF