On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 16:25, Arndt Roth <[email protected]> wrote: > > You're right. Thanks. > I had even chosen the correct name "*_meta_attr_*" and still wrote it in > instance_attributes. > > Fixed that and added globally_unique, but the crm_verify warning remained the > same. > In the end a complete heartbeat restart of all nodes helped. So I guess it > was some stale information in the LRM? > > Here is the complete and now correct clone-with-group-of-OCF-and-LSB-resource > config: > > <clone id="clone_ldirectord"> > <meta_attributes id="clone_ldirectord-meta-options"> > <attributes> > <nvpair id="clone_ldirector_conf_meta_attr_clone_max" > name="clone_max" value="3"/> > <nvpair id="clone_ldirector_conf_meta_attr_clone_node_max" > name="clone_node_max" value="1"/>
these two are wrong '_' -> '-' and just changing the values wont be enough, you need to restart the cluster in order to clear out the operation record > <nvpair id="clone_ldirector_conf_meta_attr_globally-unique" > name="globally-unique" value="false"/> > <nvpair id="clone_ldirectord-meta-options-target-role" > name="target-role" value="Started"/> > <nvpair id="clone_ldirectord-meta-options-is-managed" > name="is-managed" value="true"/> > <nvpair id="clone_ldirectord-meta-options-notify" name="notify" > value="true"/> > </attributes> > </meta_attributes> > <group id="group_clone_ldirectord_lvs-monitor"> > <primitive id="resource_ldirectord" class="ocf" type="ldirectord" > provider="heartbeat"> > <operations> > <op id="resource_ldirectord_operation_op" name="monitor" > description="ldirectord-monitor" interval="10" timeout="3" start_delay="10s" > disabled="false" role="Started" prereq="nothing" on_fail="restart"/> > </operations> > <instance_attributes id="ldirectord_inst_attributes"> > <attributes> > <nvpair id="ldirector_attr_configfile" name="configfile" > value="/etc/ha.d/ldirectord.cf"/> > <nvpair id="ldirector_attr_binary" name="ldirectord" > value="/usr/sbin/ldirectord"/> > </attributes> > </instance_attributes> > </primitive> > <primitive class="lsb" id="lvs-monitor" type="lvs-monitor" > restart_type="restart"> > <operations> > <op id="lvs-monitor_op_start" name="start" timeout="2s"/> > <op id="lvs-monitor_op_stop" name="stop" timeout="2s"/> > <op id="lvs-monitor_op_status" name="monitor" interval="5s" > timeout="2s"/> > </operations> > </primitive> > </group> > </clone> > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Dejan Muhamedagic > Gesendet: Freitag, 9. Januar 2009 15:30 > An: General Linux-HA mailing list > Betreff: Re: [Linux-HA] crm_verify bug? > > On Fri, Jan 09, 2009 at 02:26:37PM +0100, Arndt Roth wrote: >> Well, the clone runs on all nodes (see crm_mon output). That's fine and I >> guess it isn't globally unique then. It is just not verified correctly by >> crm_verify (I suppose). >> >> Here's the clone-config: >> >> >> <clone id="clone_ldirectord"> >> >> <instance_attributes id="clone_ldirectord_inst_attr"> >> <attributes> >> <nvpair id="clone_ldirector_conf_meta_attr_clone_max" >> name="clone_max" value="3"/> >> <nvpair id="clone_ldirector_conf_meta_attr_clone_node_max" >> name="clone_node_max" value="1"/> > > Hence, you have to also set globally_unique to false here. BTW, > shouldn't this be meta_attributes? > > Thanks, > > Dejan > >> </attributes> >> </instance_attributes> >> >> <group id="group_clone_ldirectord_lvs-monitor"> >> >> <primitive id="resource_ldirectord" class="ocf" type="ldirectord" >> provider="heartbeat"> >> <operations> >> <op id="resource_ldirectord_operation_op" name="monitor" >> description="ldirectord-monitor" interval="10" timeout="3" start_delay="10s" >> disabled="false" role="Started" prereq="nothing" on_ >> fail="restart"/> >> </operations> >> <instance_attributes id="ldirectord_inst_attributes"> >> <attributes> >> <nvpair id="ldirector_attr_configfile" name="configfile" >> value="/etc/ha.d/ldirectord.cf"/> >> <nvpair id="ldirector_attr_binary" name="ldirectord" >> value="/usr/sbin/ldirectord"/> >> </attributes> >> </instance_attributes> >> </primitive> >> <meta_attributes id="clone_ldirectord-meta-options"> >> <attributes> >> <nvpair id="clone_ldirectord-meta-options-target-role" >> name="target-role" value="Started"/> >> <nvpair id="clone_ldirectord-meta-options-is-managed" >> name="is-managed" value="true"/> >> <nvpair id="clone_ldirectord-meta-options-notify" >> name="notify" value="true"/> >> </attributes> >> </meta_attributes> >> >> <primitive class="lsb" id="lvs-monitor" type="lvs-monitor" >> restart_type="restart"> >> <operations> >> <op id="lvs-monitor_op_start" name="start" timeout="2s"/> >> <op id="lvs-monitor_op_stop" name="stop" timeout="2s"/> >> <op id="lvs-monitor_op_status" name="monitor" interval="5s" >> timeout="2s"/> >> </operations> >> </primitive> >> >> </group> >> >> </clone> >> >> -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht----- >> Von: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Dejan Muhamedagic >> Gesendet: Freitag, 9. Januar 2009 13:04 >> An: General Linux-HA mailing list >> Betreff: Re: [Linux-HA] crm_verify bug? >> >> Hi, >> >> On Fri, Jan 09, 2009 at 12:39:34PM +0100, Arndt Roth wrote: >> > Hi *, >> > >> > >> > >> > I have a group with one OCF and one LSB resource defined into a clone >> > (OCF-Clone + LSB-primitive in a group didn't work). >> > >> > >> > >> > Clone Set: clone_ldirectord >> > >> > Resource Group: group_clone_ldirectord_lvs-monitor:0 >> > >> > resource_ldirectord:0 (ocf::heartbeat:ldirectord): Started >> > server2 >> > >> > lvs-monitor:0 (lsb:lvs-monitor): Started server2 >> > >> > Resource Group: group_clone_ldirectord_lvs-monitor:1 >> > >> > resource_ldirectord:1 (ocf::heartbeat:ldirectord): Started >> > server1 >> > >> > lvs-monitor:1 (lsb:lvs-monitor): Started server1 >> > >> > Resource Group: group_clone_ldirectord_lvs-monitor:2 >> > >> > resource_ldirectord:2 (ocf::heartbeat:ldirectord): Started >> > server3 >> > >> > lvs-monitor:2 (lsb:lvs-monitor): Started server3 >> > >> > >> > >> > Now I get this confusing error-message on all 3 nodes when verifying >> > with crm_verify: >> > >> > >> > >> > [r...@server2:~]$ crm_verify -LV >> > >> > crm_verify[20534]: 2009/01/09_12:28:27 WARN: unpack_rsc_op: >> > resource_ldirectord:0_monitor_0 found active resource_ldirectord:0 on >> > server2 >> > >> > crm_verify[20534]: 2009/01/09_12:28:27 WARN: unpack_rsc_op: >> > resource_ldirectord:1_monitor_0 found active resource_ldirectord:1 on >> > server2 >> > >> > crm_verify[20534]: 2009/01/09_12:28:27 WARN: unpack_rsc_op: >> > resource_ldirectord:2_monitor_0 found active resource_ldirectord:2 on >> > server2 >> > >> > crm_verify[20534]: 2009/01/09_12:28:27 WARN: unpack_rsc_op: >> > lvs-monitor:2_monitor_0 found active lvs-monitor:2 on server2 >> > >> > crm_verify[20534]: 2009/01/09_12:28:27 WARN: unpack_rsc_op: >> > lvs-monitor:0_monitor_0 found active lvs-monitor:0 on server2 >> > >> > crm_verify[20534]: 2009/01/09_12:28:27 WARN: unpack_rsc_op: >> > lvs-monitor:1_monitor_0 found active lvs-monitor:1 on server2 >> > >> > >> > >> > Why does crm_verify display on all nodes that all resources are active >> > on server2? >> > >> > Apart from the error-message everything looks ok, but how can I confirm >> > that it is only a crm_verify problem or bug? >> >> Perhaps you can show the configuration too. Maybe this is due to >> globally-unique set to true (the default) for the clone? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Dejan >> >> > >> > >> > Thanks for advice, >> > >> > >> > >> > Arndt >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Linux-HA mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha >> > See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems >> _______________________________________________ >> Linux-HA mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha >> See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Linux-HA mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha >> See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems > _______________________________________________ > Linux-HA mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems > > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-HA mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems > _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
