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)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69B4B60FE8 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:59:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 57D7E1F047 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:59:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-wm1-x335.google.com (mail-wm1-x335.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::335]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 55CA21F03D for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:59:11 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm1-x335.google.com with SMTP id w24so7140192wmi.0 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 08:59:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=odiso-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=wuEWvrAsQdB1qffQfmW6crTaIdaDe5YrwXKvQIAUD5k=; b=XOx3Sel4eG0Vo/tQhJTs1IHS2JD4yxIMGkT9cuaZpivkIqiPLt0xQYH5XWPWdkglwP NcVYTNWLF7Wig6llmgZVyNpFRDTVJyZTU1y5ZlVIWJA+zx/gqCzKj+fC5SiTvIrWWggM bVo+//Vn3myhm00AYIHE2qbRNe7/E5X8fzouuqmqBRoty6mTpqoQGSNzSQP7qx/qSJ6o vA5lqICQ9emnfaTVuwzu4GM04L3ryK2zcB7SOr6MyhfuwSHTwiCtKoXRd/dO/Q+pk2hH wV4szZ5SPAbQaI+Rei7MTb+6rCeSxQe4/0C6Z1lRrum2k2/gqYvBCZ/hiEPUoLQISsIo 33QA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=wuEWvrAsQdB1qffQfmW6crTaIdaDe5YrwXKvQIAUD5k=; b=oYQP+gtkCQhe76U85tsU1yDeFBC8Mll0O/JsbAhr92tv3ZNhH5kWGGKOUr2sh3pAzR mxz7OWSeHQ/P4AQUNRL0jdvgV5ySjuSjTbCJVFDK0SkraJ2ukOoygRCEsNIwc7F/Kycm ZoW0/TdTEf5ZIR5DQuMqMZlw+OHJqlQTxN133mkH8zdr/F5vuck3RY5lxxws6VJOqyAW v1IHIBNEZEnO89QEJ95h/Jy0c9ZYdcOYPqBC2injfawToTwGtMOBsT5+CqGpDWQaqEhT V3aokj4nOTh4ZbHAQC8PZ6+Cz4ZG9r7O6nI+3qfv8jU84kC0o+zZ+Bome+HW+3BSSOFC 9ulw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5309mn78M6BpfsdngcKE3TDeXrA1lWk9fbNyI2Yd+gT91WgVNcBI SRW0S203D1Kj8QNAyqzKNWolqQ86OlaK6iy+ X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJywXgrjiHJJMHbc7ePpNibPngr3Eibh2G6E3Sv4/EXaEreYVeys3579rjs/aX9wjkN7DQIvhw== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:6456:: with SMTP id y83mr10247949wmb.59.1606496343919; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 08:59:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([79.132.236.197]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d3sm15586518wre.91.2020.11.27.08.59.03 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 27 Nov 2020 08:59:03 -0800 (PST) To: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com References: <930e1177-6137-aa49-718c-04f4fa74e975@lirmm.fr> <3e7c42b6-1a1f-d296-e240-fb98cf87a6ca@gmail.com> <47b5a337-b2ca-ce6d-37c5-e904db8d6e03@univ-fcomte.fr> From: alexandre derumier Message-ID: <843b2e4d-ff82-bbdd-6906-8e6ff90bcc96@odiso.com> Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:59:02 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <47b5a337-b2ca-ce6d-37c5-e904db8d6e03@univ-fcomte.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 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 KAM_NUMSUBJECT 0.5 Subject ends in numbers excluding current years NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE -0.0001 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, no trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [PVE-User] Python problem with upgrade to proxmoxVE6.3/ CEPH Nautilus 14.2.15 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: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 16:59:42 -0000 >>1 pools have too many placement groups Pool rbd has 128 placement groups, should have 32 >> >>I don't find any way to reduce placement groups tu 32 >> >>Any help welcome. you can't reduce PG on nautilus,  only since octopus.  (and ceph is able to do it automataaly with new pg autoscaler) I think it's a warning introduced in last nautilus update. If I remember, they are an option to disable this warning, (but I don't remember it) On 27/11/2020 17:29, Jean-Daniel TISSOT wrote: > Hi, > > I have another problem > > root@dmz-pve1:~ # ceph health HEALTH_WARN 1 pools have too many > placement groups root@dmz-pve1:~ # pveceph pool ls > ┌───────────────────────┬──────┬──────────┬────────┬───────────────────┬─────────────────┬──────────────────────┬──────────────┐ > │ Name                  │ Size │ Min Size │ PG Num │ PG Autoscale Mode > │ Crush Rule Name │               %-Used │         Used │ > ╞═══════════════════════╪══════╪══════════╪════════╪═══════════════════╪═════════════════╪══════════════════════╪══════════════╡ > │ device_health_metrics │    3 │        2 │      1 │ on                > │ replicated_rule │ 4.19273845864154e-07 │ 4534827 │ > ├───────────────────────┼──────┼──────────┼────────┼───────────────────┼─────────────────┼──────────────────────┼──────────────┤ > │ rbd                   │    3 │        2 │    128 │ warn              > │ replicated_rule │   0.0116069903597236 │ 127014329075 │ > └───────────────────────┴──────┴──────────┴────────┴───────────────────┴─────────────────┴──────────────────────┴──────────────┘ > > > In the GUI : > > 1 pools have too many placement groups Pool rbd has 128 placement > groups, should have 32 > > I don't find any way to reduce placement groups tu 32 > > Any help welcome. > > Best regards, > > Le 27/11/2020 à 14:07, Lindsay Mathieson a écrit : >> On 27/11/2020 9:47 pm, Jean-Luc Oms wrote: >>> Upgrading to last Proxmox VE / Ceph nautilus from the last 6.2 proxmox >>> VE seems to introduce a python 2/3 version problem, dashboard healt >>> stops working. >> >> Was just about to report that :) >> >> >> Same here. >>