Hi Andrew,
> > Can 1.0 reflect this revision?
> > Because there is influence else, is it impossible?
>
> I have no objection to it being added to 1.0, it should be safe.
Thanks.
About 1.0, I ask Mr. Mori for backporting.
Will you revise 1.1?
Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.
--- Andrew Beekhof <and...@beekhof.net> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 5:11 AM, <renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp> wrote:
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > Sorry....
> > My response was late.
> >
> >> I think the smartest thing to do here is drop the cib_scope_local flag
> >> from -f
> >
> > � � � �if(do_force) {
> > � � � � � � �
> > �crm_debug("Forcing...");
> > /* � � � � � �
> > �cib_options |=
cib_scope_local|cib_quorum_override; */
> > � � � � � � �
> > �cib_options |=
cib_quorum_override;
> > � � � �}
> >
> >
> > I confirmed movement with you according to a revision.
> > The resource moves well.
> >
> > Can 1.0 reflect this revision?
> > Because there is influence else, is it impossible?
>
> I have no objection to it being added to 1.0, it should be safe.
>
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Hideo Yamauchi.
> >
> > --- Andrew Beekhof <and...@beekhof.net> wrote:
> >
> >> 2010/11/8 �<renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp>:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > By two simple node constitution, it caused trouble(monitor error) in a
> >> > resource.
> >> >
> >> > ============
> >> > Last updated: Mon Nov �8 10:16:50 2010
> >> > Stack: Heartbeat
> >> > Current DC: srv02 (f80f87fd-cc09-43c7-80bc-8d9e96de376b) - partition
> >> > WITHOUT quorum
> >> > Version: 1.0.9-0a40fd0cb9f2fcedef9d1967115c912314c57438
> >> > 2 Nodes configured, unknown expected votes
> >> > 1 Resources configured.
> >> > ============
> >> >
> >> > Online: [ srv01 srv02 ]
> >> >
> >> > �Resource Group: grpDummy
> >> > � � prmDummy1-1 � � �
> >> > �(ocf::heartbeat:Dummy):
> Started
> > srv02
> >> > � � prmDummy1-2 � � �
> >> > �(ocf::heartbeat:Dummy):
> Started
> > srv02
> >> > � � prmDummy1-3 � � �
> >> > �(ocf::heartbeat:Dummy):
> Started
> > srv02
> >> > � � prmDummy1-4 � � �
> >> > �(ocf::heartbeat:Dummy):
> Started
> > srv02
> >> >
> >> > Migration summary:
> >> > * Node srv02:
> >> > * Node srv01:
> >> > � prmDummy1-1: migration-threshold=1 fail-count=1
> >> >
> >> > Failed actions:
> >> > � �prmDummy1-1_monitor_30000 (node=srv01, call=7, rc=7,
> >> > status=complete): not
> > running
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I carried out the next command consecutively after a resource exceeded a
> >> > fail-over.
> >> >
> >> > [r...@srv01 ~]# crm_resource -C -r prmDummy1-1 -N srv01;crm_resource -M
> >> > -r grpDummy -N
> srv01
> >> -f -Q
> >> >
> >> > ============
> >> > Last updated: Mon Nov �8 10:17:33 2010
> >> > Stack: Heartbeat
> >> > Current DC: srv02 (f80f87fd-cc09-43c7-80bc-8d9e96de376b) - partition
> >> > WITHOUT quorum
> >> > Version: 1.0.9-0a40fd0cb9f2fcedef9d1967115c912314c57438
> >> > 2 Nodes configured, unknown expected votes
> >> > 1 Resources configured.
> >> > ============
> >> >
> >> > Online: [ srv01 srv02 ]
> >> >
> >> > �Resource Group: grpDummy
> >> > � � prmDummy1-1 � � �
> >> > �(ocf::heartbeat:Dummy):
> Started
> > srv02
> >> > � � prmDummy1-2 � � �
> >> > �(ocf::heartbeat:Dummy):
> Started
> > srv02
> >> > � � prmDummy1-3 � � �
> >> > �(ocf::heartbeat:Dummy):
> Started
> > srv02
> >> > � � prmDummy1-4 � � �
> >> > �(ocf::heartbeat:Dummy):
> Started
> > srv02
> >> >
> >> > Migration summary:
> >> > * Node srv02:
> >> > * Node srv01:
> >> >
> >> > But, the resource does not move to a srv01 node.
> >> >
> >> > Does the "crm_resource -M" command have to carry it out after waiting
> >> > for a S_IDLE state?
> >> >
> >> > Or is this phenomenon a bug?
> >> >
> >> > �* I attach a collection of hb_report file
> >>
> >> So the problem here is that not only does -f �enable logic in
> >> move_resource(), but also
> >>
> >> � � � � � � � cib_options
> >> |=
cib_scope_local|cib_quorum_override;
> >>
> >> Combined with the fact that crm_resource -C is not synchronous in 1.0,
> >> if you run -M on a non-DC node, the updates hit the local cib while
> >> the cluster is re-probing the resource(s).
> >> This results in the two CIBs getting out of sync:
> >> Nov �8 10:17:15 srv01 crmd: [5367]: WARN: cib_native_callback: CIB
> >> command failed: Application of an update diff failed
> >> Nov �8 10:17:15 srv01 crmd: [5367]: WARN: cib_native_callback: CIB
> >> command failed: Application of an update diff failed
> >>
> >> and the process of re-syncing them results in the behavior you saw.
> >>
> >> I think the smartest thing to do here is drop the cib_scope_local flag
> >> from -f
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org
> >> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
> >>
> >> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> >> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> >> Bugs:
> >> http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org
> > http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
> >
> > Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> > Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> > Bugs:
> > http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org
> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
>
> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> Bugs:
> http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker
>
_______________________________________________
Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org
http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker
