<font size=2 face="sans-serif">hy,</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">thx i configured these values now. i
hope that we won't face this problem again, otherwise, like i said, i turned
on the debug mode of the ping ra, and if i get the next maintenance window,
i'll turn on cluster debog mode. so we'd have more log info to find the
reason for this problem.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">thx again.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">kr patrik</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
</font><font size=2 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">Mit freundlichen Grüßen
/ Best Regards<br>
<b><br>
Patrik Rapposch, BSc</b><br>
System Administration<br>
<b><br>
KNAPP Systemintegration GmbH</b><br>
Waltenbachstraße 9<br>
8700 Leoben, Austria <br>
Phone: +43 3842 805-915<br>
Fax: +43 3842 82930-500<br>
patrik.rapposch@knapp.com <br>
</font><a href=www.KNAPP.com><font size=2 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">www.KNAPP.com</font></a><font size=2 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">
<br>
<br>
Commercial register number: FN 138870x<br>
Commercial register court: Leoben</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
</font><font size=1 color=#d2d2d2 face="sans-serif"><br>
The information in this e-mail (including any attachment) is confidential
and intended to be for the use of the addressee(s) only. If you have received
the e-mail by mistake, any disclosure, copy, distribution or use of the
contents of the e-mail is prohibited, and you must delete the e-mail from
your system. As e-mail can be changed electronically KNAPP assumes no responsibility
for any alteration to this e-mail or its attachments. KNAPP has taken every
reasonable precaution to ensure that any attachment to this e-mail has
been swept for virus. However, KNAPP does not accept any liability for
damage sustained as a result of such attachment being virus infected and
strongly recommend that you carry out your own virus check before opening
any attachment.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td width=40%><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenberg@linbit.com></b>
</font>
<p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">11.01.2011 14:47</font>
<table border>
<tr valign=top>
<td bgcolor=white>
<div align=center><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Bitte antworten an<br>
The Pacemaker cluster resource manager <pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org></font></div></table>
<br>
<td width=59%>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">An</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org</font>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Kopie</font></div>
<td>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Thema</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Re: [Pacemaker] pingd process dies for
no reason</font></table>
<br>
<table>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<td></table>
<br></table>
<br>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 11:24:35AM +0100, Patrik.Rapposch@knapp.com
wrote:<br>
> we already made changes to the interval and timeout (<op <br>
> id="pingd-op-monitor-30s" interval="30s" name="monitor"
timeout="10s"/>).<br>
> <br>
> how big should dampen be set?<br>
> <br>
> please correct me, if i am wrong, as i calculate it as following:<br>
> assuming the last check was ok and in the next second, the failures
takes <br>
> place:<br>
> then we there would be 29s till the next check will start, and another
10 <br>
> seconds timeout, plus 5 seconds dampen. this would be 44 seconds,
isn't <br>
> that enough?<br>
<br>
I think "dampen" needs to be larger than the monitoring interval.<br>
And the timeout on the operation should be large enough that<br>
ping, even if the remote is unreachable for the first time,<br>
will timeout by itself (and not killed prematurely by lrmd because<br>
the operation timeout elapsed).<br>
<br>
try with interval 15s, dampen 20,<br>
instance parameter timeout: something explicit, if you want to.<br>
instance parameter attempts: something explicit, if you want to.<br>
monitor operation timeout=60s <br>
<br>
BTW, someone should really implement the fping based ping RA ...<br>
Or did I miss it?<br>
<br>
-- <br>
: Lars Ellenberg<br>
: LINBIT | Your Way to High Availability<br>
: DRBD/HA support and consulting </font></tt><a href=http://www.linbit.com/><tt><font size=2>http://www.linbit.com</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2><br>
<br>
DRBD® and LINBIT® are registered trademarks of LINBIT, Austria.<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org<br>
</font></tt><a href=http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker><tt><font size=2>http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2><br>
<br>
Project Home: </font></tt><a href=http://www.clusterlabs.org/><tt><font size=2>http://www.clusterlabs.org</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2><br>
Getting started: </font></tt><a href=http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf><tt><font size=2>http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2><br>
Bugs: </font></tt><a href="http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker"><tt><font size=2>http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2><br>
</font></tt>
<br>