From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A3FA61C79 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 15:13:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E78FB24AD3 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 15:12:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from icewarp.tuxis.nl (icewarp.tuxis.net [IPv6:2a03:7900:2:0:31:3:104:151]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 4A23324AB6 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 15:12:48 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; t=1597842761; x=1598447561; s=icewarp; d=tuxis.nl; c=relaxed/relaxed; v=1; bh=f7/6UnDBg8WvXPCbTQD/dBdPduTEsLWrE95gny0Z97I=; h=From:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=xAyB79Bp9q/TLfH2WUrE6zFXpvbiEusUfqX2VJUH7WiIOOt/w/KlLc8qJFiC/J53zA/JkQtMJSSKsohm/fC2z+myk0MbF/0EkkByfARZ+QQDVaNDknuoVyO/58NUEnJhWEKxY8t/Y8l/uJYWUktrQ6nKGdSBVUBzk808v5MiF+dEBYB88L0ExV1RGERO1r1FfrCHcdZ75aLaWDhbIWKsnukKMBZ9THdOjApKc0eHnZX0j4N9DR7JOOAG9iyA3gVxAD6wEEE9E0na0olYC2v+1IQKZgGhKhi/eZgSHGKh0ZLBKL1OtkndKBYagnD0bOko1xYyq/M9Yn7Oonmh28wP0A== Received: from shell.tuxis.net ([2a03:7900:2:0:31:3:104:134]) by icewarp.tuxis.nl (12.1.1 build 4 DEB9 x64) with SMTP (SSL) id 202008191512413315 for ; Wed, 19 Aug 2020 15:12:41 +0200 Received: (nullmailer pid 32042 invoked by uid 1000); Wed, 19 Aug 2020 13:12:41 -0000 Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 15:12:41 +0200 From: Mark Schouten To: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com Message-ID: <20200819131241.b5cfhmq4fd326xoi@shell.tuxis.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Ripe-Handle: MS8714-RIPE User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) X-CTCH: RefID="str=0001.0A782F23.5F3D2549.0051,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0"; Spam="Unknown"; VOD="Unknown" X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.264 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS 0.249 From and EnvelopeFrom 2nd level mail domains are different SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_NONE 0.001 SPF: sender does not publish an SPF Record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [tuxis.nl, proxmox.com] Subject: [PVE-User] Upgrade Luminous to Nautilus slow OSD restart X-BeenThere: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE user list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 13:13:20 -0000 Hi, Last night I did a 5.x to 6 upgrade, including Ceph Luminous to Nautilus. Restarts of an OSD took up to two hours. Asking on the ceph-user mailinglist, this seems to be an OMAP fsck fix. I saw that this was mentioned here: https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Ceph_Nautilus_to_Octopus#Restart_the_OSD_daemon_on_all_nodes But I think it might be wise to mention it on the Luminous to Nautilus page as well. Thanks, -- Mark Schouten | Tuxis B.V. KvK: 74698818 | http://www.tuxis.nl/ T: +31 318 200208 | info@tuxis.nl