From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg Farnum Subject: Re: pgs stuck inactive Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 10:09:23 -0700 Message-ID: References: <3154FE08568349E9B9EB0EBBCE4EDFB2@dreamhost.com> <8260F00ADA384FEDBA6AA9873273BB38@dreamhost.com> <90B1EE3CB1C7494B9B097AD5E4BCF272@dreamhost.com> <454EEF491D1B41C3B0382F1A101BABE0@dreamhost.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-yx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.213.174]:46460 "EHLO mail-yx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754454Ab2DSRJ1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:09:27 -0400 Received: by yenl12 with SMTP id l12so4620951yen.19 for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2012 10:09:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Damien Churchill Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday, April 19, 2012 at 2:07 AM, Damien Churchill wrote: > On 18 April 2012 21:41, Greg Farnum wrote: > > That should get everything back up and running. The one sour note is that due to the bug in the past, your data (ie, filesystem) and vmimages pools have gotten conflated. It shouldn't cause any issues (they use very different naming schemes), but they're tied together in terms of replication and the raw pool statistics. > > (If that's important you can create a new pool and move the rbd images to it.) > > > > Thanks a lot Greg! > > All back up and running now. What negative side effects could having > the pools mixed together have, given that I'm not doing any special > placement of them? There shouldn't be any negative side effects from it at all. It just means that you've got a mixed namespace, and if you don't care about that none of our current tools do either. (Something like the still-entirely-theoretical ceph-fsck probably wouldn't appreciate it, but we don't have anything like that right now.)