From: Nicolas Frey <n.frey@proxmox.com>
To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH pve-docs 1/1] ceph: add warning about mixing device-specific with device-unspecific CRUSH rules when using autoscaler
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2026 09:30:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2698684c-ee19-4689-8da5-2557d09dedfa@proxmox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <878qafikbb.fsf@proxmox.com>
On 4/22/26 8:23 AM, Kefu Chai wrote:
> Nicolas Frey <n.frey@proxmox.com> writes:
>
> Hi Nicolas, thanks for this improvement. A few nits:
>
>> Suggested-by: Friedrich Weber <f.weber@proxmox.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Frey <n.frey@proxmox.com>
>> ---
>> pveceph.adoc | 3 +++
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/pveceph.adoc b/pveceph.adoc
>> index 2aae6d6..dfa5d95 100644
>> --- a/pveceph.adoc
>> +++ b/pveceph.adoc
>> @@ -916,6 +916,9 @@ TIP: If the pool already contains objects, these must be moved accordingly.
>> Depending on your setup, this may introduce a big performance impact on your
>> cluster. As an alternative, you can create a new pool and move disks separately.
>>
>> +WARNING: When using the autoscaler, all pools must either exclusively be assigned
>> +device-specific or device-unspecific CRUSH rules. Mixing them across pools will
>>
>
> device-specific / device-unspecific is not Ceph's terminology. Ceph's
> terms are "CRUSH rules that specify a device class", or simply "device
> class rules".
>
Thanks! I was not aware of the terminology used by ceph here
>> +prevent the autoscaler from functioning.
>
> this might overstates the problem caused by overlapped roots. The
> autoscaler keeps running: it just skips pools whose CRUSH rules's OSD
> sets overlap, and the pg_num is not adjustted for those pools. In other
> words, non-overlapping pools continue to scale.
Ah, thanks for the explanation!
>
> So, probably we can be more specific here? like:
>
> When using the PG autoscaler, all pools in the cluster must use
> CRUSH rules of the same kind, either all specifying a device class,
> or all without one. Otherwise the autoscaler will skip the affected
> pools and their `pg_num` will not be adjusted.
>
> what do you think?
>
That sounds great! I'll send a v2 with your suggestions
>>
>> Ceph Client
>> -----------
>> --
>> 2.47.3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-22 7:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-21 8:05 [PATCH pve-docs 1/1] ceph: add warning about mixing device-specific with device-unspecific CRUSH rules when using autoscaler Nicolas Frey
2026-04-22 6:24 ` Kefu Chai
2026-04-22 7:30 ` Nicolas Frey [this message]
2026-04-22 7:55 ` superseded: " Nicolas Frey
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2698684c-ee19-4689-8da5-2557d09dedfa@proxmox.com \
--to=n.frey@proxmox.com \
--cc=pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.