[Pacemaker] Corosync 1.4.7: zombie (defunct)

Andrew Beekhof andrew at beekhof.net
Sun Jan 4 22:59:35 EST 2015


pacemaker version?  it looks familiar but it depends on the version number.

> On 29 Dec 2014, at 10:24 pm, Sergey Arlashin <sergeyarl.maillist at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> Recently I've noticed that one of my nodes had OFFLINE status in 'crm status' output. But it actually was not. I could ssh on this node. I could get 'crm status' from that node's console. After some time it became online. It happened several times without any obvious reason with other nodes. 
> 
> Still no error of fatal messages in logs. The only warning messages I could get from corosync.log were the following:
> 
> Dec 29 10:56:34 lb-node2 cib: [2238]: WARN: cib_process_diff: Diff 0.233.1346 -> 0.233.1347 not applied to 0.233.1354: current "num_updates" is greater than required
> Dec 29 10:56:34 lb-node2 cib: [2238]: WARN: cib_process_diff: Diff 0.233.1347 -> 0.233.1348 not applied to 0.233.1354: current "num_updates" is greater than required
> Dec 29 10:56:34 lb-node2 cib: [2238]: WARN: cib_process_diff: Diff 0.233.1348 -> 0.233.1349 not applied to 0.233.1354: current "num_updates" is greater than required
> Dec 29 10:56:34 lb-node2 cib: [2238]: WARN: cib_process_diff: Diff 0.233.1349 -> 0.233.1350 not applied to 0.233.1354: current "num_updates" is greater than required
> Dec 29 10:56:34 lb-node2 cib: [2238]: WARN: cib_process_diff: Diff 0.233.1350 -> 0.233.1351 not applied to 0.233.1354: current "num_updates" is greater than required
> Dec 29 10:56:34 lb-node2 cib: [2238]: WARN: cib_process_diff: Diff 0.233.1351 -> 0.233.1352 not applied to 0.233.1354: current "num_updates" is greater than required
> Dec 29 10:56:34 lb-node2 cib: [2238]: WARN: cib_process_diff: Diff 0.233.1352 -> 0.233.1353 not applied to 0.233.1354: current "num_updates" is greater than required
> Dec 29 10:56:34 lb-node2 cib: [2238]: WARN: cib_process_diff: Diff 0.233.1353 -> 0.233.1354 not applied to 0.233.1354: current "num_updates" is greater than required
> Dec 29 10:56:34 lb-node2 attrd: [2240]: WARN: attrd_cib_callback: Update 491 for last-failure-Cachier=1419729443 failed: Application of an update diff failed
> Dec 29 10:56:34 lb-node2 attrd: [2240]: WARN: attrd_cib_callback: Update 494 for fail-count-Cachier=1 failed: Application of an update diff failed
> Dec 29 10:56:34 lb-node2 attrd: [2240]: WARN: attrd_cib_callback: Update 497 for probe_complete=true failed: Application of an update diff failed
> Dec 29 10:56:34 lb-node2 attrd: [2240]: WARN: attrd_cib_callback: Update 500 for last-failure-Cachier=1419729443 failed: Application of an update diff failed
> Dec 29 10:56:34 lb-node2 attrd: [2240]: WARN: attrd_cib_callback: Update 503 for fail-count-Cachier=1 failed: Application of an update diff failed
> Dec 29 10:56:37 lb-node2 cib: [2238]: WARN: cib_process_diff: Diff 0.233.1338 -> 0.233.1339 not applied to 0.233.1382: current "num_updates" is greater than required
> Dec 29 10:56:37 lb-node2 cib: [2238]: WARN: cib_process_diff: Diff 0.233.1339 -> 0.233.1340 not applied to 0.233.1382: current "num_updates" is greater than required
> Dec 29 10:56:37 lb-node2 cib: [2238]: WARN: cib_process_diff: Diff 0.233.1340 -> 0.233.1341 not applied to 0.233.1382: current "num_updates" is greater than required
> Dec 29 10:56:37 lb-node2 cib: [2238]: WARN: cib_process_diff: Diff 0.233.1341 -> 0.233.1342 not applied to 0.233.1382: current "num_updates" is greater than required
> Dec 29 10:56:37 lb-node2 cib: [2238]: WARN: cib_process_diff: Diff 0.233.1342 -> 0.233.1343 not applied to 0.233.1382: current "num_updates" is greater than required
> 
> After exploring corosync processes with ps I found out that on all my nodes there are zombie corosync procs like:
> 
> root     13892  0.0  0.0      0     0 ?        Z    Dec26   0:04 [corosync] <defunct>
> root     21793  0.0  0.0      0     0 ?        Z    Dec26   0:00 [corosync] <defunct>
> root     27009  1.3  1.0 714292 10784 ?        Ssl  Dec18 223:38 /usr/sbin/corosync
> 
> Is it ok to have zombie corosync procs on nodes? Or does it suggest that something wrong is going on ? 
> 
> Thanks in advance
> 
> --
> Best regards,
> Sergey Arlashin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker at 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://bugs.clusterlabs.org





More information about the Pacemaker mailing list