[ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: [Question] About movement of pacemaker_remote.
Ulrich Windl
Ulrich.Windl at rz.uni-regensburg.de
Mon May 11 02:39:36 EDT 2015
>>> <renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp> schrieb am 11.05.2015 um 06:22 in Nachricht
<361916.15877.qm at web200006.mail.kks.yahoo.co.jp>:
> Hi All,
>
> I matched the OS version of the remote node with a host once again and
> confirmed it in Pacemaker1.1.13-rc2.
>
> It was the same even if I made a host RHEL7.1.(bl460g8n1)
> I made the remote host RHEL7.1.(snmp1)
>
> The first crm_resource -C fails.
> --------------------------------
> [root at bl460g8n1 ~]# crm_resource -C -r snmp1
> Cleaning up snmp1 on bl460g8n1
> Waiting for 1 replies from the CRMd. OK
>
> [root at bl460g8n1 ~]# crm_mon -1 -Af
> Last updated: Mon May 11 12:44:31 2015
> Last change: Mon May 11 12:43:30 2015
> Stack: corosync
> Current DC: bl460g8n1 - partition WITHOUT quorum
> Version: 1.1.12-7a2e3ae
> 2 Nodes configured
> 3 Resources configured
>
>
> Online: [ bl460g8n1 ]
> RemoteOFFLINE: [ snmp1 ]
So your host and you resource are both named "snmp1"? I also don't have much experience with cleaning up resources for a node that is offline. What change should it make (while the node is offline)?
>
> Host-rsc1 (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started bl460g8n1
> Remote-rsc1 (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started bl460g8n1 (failure ignored)
>
> Node Attributes:
> * Node bl460g8n1:
> + ringnumber_0 : 192.168.101.21 is UP
> + ringnumber_1 : 192.168.102.21 is UP
>
> Migration summary:
> * Node bl460g8n1:
> snmp1: migration-threshold=1 fail-count=1000000 last-failure='Mon May 11
> 12:44:28 2015'
>
> Failed actions:
> snmp1_start_0 on bl460g8n1 'unknown error' (1): call=5, status=Timed
> Out, exit-reason='none', last-rc-change='Mon May 11 12:43:31 2015', queued=0ms,
> exec=0ms
> --------------------------------
>
>
> The second crm_resource -C succeeded and was connected to the remote host.
Then the node was online it seems.
Regards,
Ulrich
> --------------------------------
> [root at bl460g8n1 ~]# crm_mon -1 -Af
> Last updated: Mon May 11 12:44:54 2015
> Last change: Mon May 11 12:44:48 2015
> Stack: corosync
> Current DC: bl460g8n1 - partition WITHOUT quorum
> Version: 1.1.12-7a2e3ae
> 2 Nodes configured
> 3 Resources configured
>
>
> Online: [ bl460g8n1 ]
> RemoteOnline: [ snmp1 ]
>
> Host-rsc1 (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started bl460g8n1
> Remote-rsc1 (ocf::heartbeat:Dummy): Started snmp1
> snmp1 (ocf::pacemaker:remote): Started bl460g8n1
>
> Node Attributes:
> * Node bl460g8n1:
> + ringnumber_0 : 192.168.101.21 is UP
> + ringnumber_1 : 192.168.102.21 is UP
> * Node snmp1:
>
> Migration summary:
> * Node bl460g8n1:
> * Node snmp1:
> --------------------------------
>
> The gnutls of a host and the remote node was the next version.
>
> gnutls-devel-3.3.8-12.el7.x86_64
> gnutls-dane-3.3.8-12.el7.x86_64
> gnutls-c++-3.3.8-12.el7.x86_64
> gnutls-3.3.8-12.el7.x86_64
> gnutls-utils-3.3.8-12.el7.x86_64
>
>
> Best Regards,
> Hideo Yamauchi.
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp" <renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp>
>> To: Cluster Labs - All topics related to open-source clustering welcomed
> <users at clusterlabs.org>
>> Cc:
>> Date: 2015/4/28, Tue 14:06
>> Subject: Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: [Question] About movement of
> pacemaker_remote.
>>
>> Hi David,
>>
>> Even if the result changed the remote node to RHEL7.1, it was the same.
>>
>>
>> I try it with a host node of pacemaker as RHEL7.1 this time.
>>
>>
>> I noticed an interesting phenomenon.
>> The remote node fails in a reconnection in the first crm_resource.
>> However, the remote node succeeds in a reconnection in the second
> crm_resource.
>>
>> I think that I have some problem with the point where I cut the connection
> with
>> the remote node first.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Hideo Yamauchi.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp"
>> <renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp>
>>> To: Cluster Labs - All topics related to open-source clustering welcomed
>> <users at clusterlabs.org>
>>> Cc:
>>> Date: 2015/4/28, Tue 11:52
>>> Subject: Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: [Question] About movement of
>> pacemaker_remote.
>>>
>>> Hi David,
>>> Thank you for comments.
>>>> At first glance this looks gnutls related. GNUTLS is returning -50
>> during
>>> receive
>>>
>>>> on the client side (pacemaker's side). -50 maps to 'invalid
>>> request'. >debug: crm_remote_recv_once: TLS receive failed: The
>>> request is invalid. >We treat this error as fatal and destroy the
>> connection.
>>> I've never encountered
>>>> this error and I don't know what causes it. It's possible
>>> there's a bug in
>>>> our gnutls usage... it's also possible there's a bug in the
>> version
>>> of gnutls
>>>> that is in use as well.
>>> We built the remote node in RHEL6.5.
>>> Because it may be a problem of gnutls, I confirm it in RHEL7.1.
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Hideo Yamauchi.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Users mailing list: Users at clusterlabs.org
>>> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
>>> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
>>> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list: Users at clusterlabs.org
>> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
>> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
>> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list: Users at clusterlabs.org
> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> 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 Users
mailing list