[pve-devel] [PATCH manager v4 1/3] api ceph osd: add OSD index, metadata and lv-info

[Aaron Lauterer]

On 12/7/22 18:23, Alwin Antreich wrote:
> December 7, 2022 2:22 PM, "Aaron Lauterer" <a.lauterer at proxmox.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 12/7/22 12:15, Alwin Antreich wrote:
>>
[...]
>>
>> 'ceph-volume' is used to gather the infos, except for the creation time
>> of the LV which is retrieved via 'lvs'.
>>> You could use lvs/vgs directly, the ceph osd relevant infos are in the lv_tags.
>>
>> IIRC, and I looked at it again, mapping the OSD ID to the associated LV/VG would be a manual lookup
>> via /var/lib/ceph/osd/ceph-X/block which is a symlink to the LV/VG.
>> So yeah, would be possible, but I think a bit more fragile should something change (as unlikely as
>> it is) in comparsion to using ceph-volume.
> 
> The lv_tags already shows the ID (ceph.osd_id=<id>). And I just see that `ceph-volume lvm list
> <id>` also exists, that is definitely faster then listing all OSDs.

Ok I see now what you meant with the lv tags. I'll think about it. Adding the 
OSD ID to the ceph-volume call is definitely a good idea in case we stick with it.

> 
>> I don't expect these API endpoints to be run all the time, and am therefore okay if they are a bit
>> more expensive regarding computation resources.
>>
>>> `lvs -o lv_all,vg_all --reportformat=json`
>>> `vgs -o vg_all,pv_all --reportformat=json`
>>> Why do you want to expose the lv-info?
>>
>> Why not? The LVs are the only thing I found for an OSD that contain some hint to when it was
>> created. Adding more general infos such as VG and LV for a specific OSD can help users understand
>> where the actual data is stored. And that without digging even deeper into how things are handled
>> internally and how it is mapped.
> 
> In my experience this data is only useful if you want to handle the OSD on the CLI. Hence my
> question about the use-case. :)
> 
> The metdata on the other hand displays all disks, sizes and more of an OSD. Then for example you
> can display DB/WAL devices in the UI and how big the DB partition is.

Did you look at the rest of the patches, or gave it a try on a test cluster? 
Quite a bit of the metadata for each device is shown. With additional infos of 
the underlying volume. I think it is nice, as it can make it a bit easier to 
know where to look for the correct volumes when CLI interaction on a deeper 
level is needed.

If you see something that should be added as well, let me know :)

And again, the creation time of the LV is the only thing I found where one can 
get an idea how old an OSD is.

> 
> Cheers,
> Alwin
>