Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH storage 1/2] fix #5779: rbd: allow to pass custom krbd map options

[Friedrich Weber <f.weber@proxmox.com>]

On 30/10/2024 09:41, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
> Am 25/10/2024 um 13:13 schrieb Friedrich Weber:
>> When KRBD is enabled for an RBD storage, the storage plugin calls out
>> to `rbd map` to map an RBD image as a block device on the host.
>> Sometimes it might be necessary to pass custom options to `rbd map`.
>> For instance, in some setups with Windows VMs, KRBD logs `bad
>> crc/signature` and VMs performance is degraded unless the `rxbounce`
>> option is enabled, as reported in the forum [1].
>>
>> To allow users to specify custom options for KRBD, introduce a
>> corresponding `krbd-map-options` property to the RBD plugin. The
>> property is designed to only accept a supported set of map options.
>> For now, this is only the `rxbounce` map option, but the supported set
>> can be extended in the future.
>>
>> The reasoning for constraining the supported set of map options
>> instead of allowing to pass a free-form option string is as follows:
>> If `rxbounce` turns out to be a sensible default, accepting a
>> free-form option string now will make it hard to switch over the
>> default to `rxbounce` while still allowing users to disable `rxbounce`
>> if needed. This would require scanning the free-form string for a
>> `norxbounce` or similar, which is cumbersome.
> 
> Reading the Ceph KRBD option docs [0] it seems a bit like it might
> be valid to always enable this for OS type Windows? Which could safe
> us an option here and avoid doing this storage wide.

I don't think the 'bad crc/signature' errors necessarily occur for each
and every Windows VM on KRBD. But then again, I just set up a Windows
Server 2022 VM on KRBD and got ~10 of those quite quickly, with
innocuous actions (opening the browser and the like). Also some users
recently reported [1] the need for rxbounce.

So yes, enabling rxbounce for all Windows VM disks might be a good
alternative, but as Fabian points out, technically this isn't really
possible at the moment, because activate_volume doesn't know about the
corresponding VM disk's ostype.

>> If users need to set a map option that `krbd-map-options` does not
>> support (yet), they can alternatively set the RBD config option
>> `rbd_default_map_options` [2].
> 
> But that would work now already? So this is basically just to expose it
> directly in the PVE (UI) stack?

In my tests, setting the `rbd_default_map_options` works for enabling
rxbounce. A forum user reported problems with that approach and I asked
for more details [2], but I haven't heard back yet.

> One reason I'm not totally happy with such stuff is that storage wide is
> quite a big scope; users might then tend to configure the same Ceph pool as
> multiple PVE storages, something that can have bad side effects.
> We basically had this issue for when the krbd flag was added first, then
> it was an "always use krbd or never user krbd" flag, now it's rather an
> "always use krbd or else use what works (librbd for VMs and krbd for CTs)"
> flag, and a big reason was that otherwise one would need two pools or,
> worse, exposing the same pool twice to PVE. This patch feels a bit like
> going slightly back to that direction, albeit it's not 1:1 the same and
> it might be fine, but I'd also like to have the alternatives evaluated a
> bit more closely before going this route.

Yeah, I see the point.

Of course, another alternative is enabling `rxbounce` unconditionally,
as initially requested in [1]. I'm a hesitant to do that because from
reading its description I'd expect it could have a performance impact --
it's probably small, if any, but this should probably be checked before
changing the default.

[1] https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/155741/
[2] https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/155741/post-715664


_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel