quincy: mon: pg_num_check() according to crush rule
Corresponding BZ: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2153654
reverting as an intermediate step before fixing in Q and main: https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/49465
#3 Updated by Matan Breizman 12 months ago
- Subject changed from mon: pg_num_check underflow to quincy: mon: pg_num_check() according to crush rule
After the revert is merged (https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/49465),
pg_num_check() will return to not taking the crush rule into account when calculating projected pg num and osd num.
We prefer pg_num_check() to work inaccurately rather than resulting in an underflow error (as reported in the BZ attached).
The fix for correct pg num count will be backported to Q after the revert is merged (main PR for the fix: https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/49507).
This tracker is opened to address the (future) fix* to pg_num_check() in Q.
*Taking crush rule into account and skipping the check when decreasing the pool size.