# Host Maintenance¶

All hosts that support Ceph daemons need to support maintenance activity, whether the host is physical or virtual. This means that management workflows should provide a simple and consistent way to support this operational requirement. This document defines the maintenance strategy that could be implemented in cephadm and mgr/cephadm.

## High Level Design¶

Placing a host into maintenance, adopts the following workflow;

1. confirm that the removal of the host does not impact data availability (the following steps will assume it is safe to proceed)

• orch host ok-to-stop <host> would be used here

2. if the host has osd daemons, apply noout to the host subtree to prevent data migration from triggering during the planned maintenance slot.

3. Stop the ceph target (all daemons stop)

4. Disable the ceph target on that host, to prevent a reboot from automatically starting ceph services again)

Exiting Maintenance, is basically the reverse of the above sequence

The ceph orch command will be extended to support maintenance.

ceph orch host enter-maintenance <host> [ --check ]
ceph orch host exit-maintenance <host>


Note

In addition, the host’s status should be updated to reflect whether it is in maintenance or not.

### The ‘check’ Option¶

The orch host ok-to-stop command focuses on ceph daemons (mon, osd, mds), which provides the first check. However, a ceph cluster also uses other types of daemons for monitoring, management and non-native protocol support which means the logic will need to consider service impact too. The ‘check’ option provides this additional layer to alert the user of service impact to secondary daemons.

The list below shows some of these additional daemons.

• mgr (not included in ok-to-stop checks)

• rgw

• haproxy

• iscsi gateways

• ganesha gateways

By using the –check option first, the Admin can choose whether to proceed. This workflow is obviously optional for the CLI user, but could be integrated into the UI workflow to help less experienced Administators manage the cluster.

By adopting this two-phase approach, a UI based workflow would look something like this.

1. User selects a host to place into maintenance

• orchestrator checks for data and service impact

2. If potential impact is shown, the next steps depend on the impact type

• data availability : maintenance is denied, informing the user of the issue

• service availability : user is provided a list of affected services and asked to confirm

## Components Impacted¶

Implementing this capability will require changes to the following;

• Add maintenance subcommand with the following ‘verbs’; enter, exit, check

• data gathering would be skipped for hosts in a maintenance state

• mgr/orchestrator

• add CLI commands to OrchestratorCli which expose the enter/exit and check interaction

## Ideas for Future Work¶

1. When a host is placed into maintenance, the time of the event could be persisted. This would allow the orchestrator layer to establish a maintenance window for the task and alert if the maintenance window has been exceeded.

2. The maintenance process could support plugins to allow other integration tasks to be initiated as part of the transition to and from maintenance. This plugin capability could support actions like;

• alert suppression to 3rd party monitoring framework(s)

• service level reporting, to record outage windows