[ClusterLabs] Pending Fencing Actions shown in pcs status
Klaus Wenninger
kwenning at redhat.com
Tue Jan 12 09:11:11 EST 2021
On 1/12/21 3:01 PM, renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp wrote:
> Hi Steffen,
>
> As Klaus says, if you stop the node, the problem display disappears.
Maybe let's stress one more time here that all nodes have to be in the
stopped
state at the same time for at least a short moment for the history to go
away -
both the good and the bad.
Klaus
> However, the cause of the problem is currently unknown.
> To find out the cause, it needs to be reproduced, but the procedure is unknown at this time.
>
>
> The problem is different from the Bugzilla fix I have addressed, as the topology is not set.
>
>
> Best Regards,
> Hideo Yamauchi.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Klaus Wenninger <kwenning at redhat.com>
>> To: Steffen Vinther Sørensen <svinther at gmail.com>
>> Cc: renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp; Cluster Labs - All topics related to open-source clustering welcomed <users at clusterlabs.org>
>> Date: 2021/1/12, Tue 21:29
>> Subject: Re: [ClusterLabs] Pending Fencing Actions shown in pcs status
>>
>>
>> On 1/12/21 12:46 PM, Steffen Vinther Sørensen wrote:
>>
>> Yes.
>>>
>>> 'pcs cluster stop --all' + reboot all nodes
> Thanks! That is the ultimate action ;-)
>> Just starting the cluster via pcs would probably already
>> have the effect of making the pending fence actions
>> go away.
>> But still we should try to somehow reproduce the issue
>> as it shouldn't happen.
>>
>> Klaus
>>
>>
>>> /Steffen
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 11:43 AM Klaus Wenninger <kwenning at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 1/12/21 11:23 AM, Steffen Vinther Sørensen wrote:
>>>> Hello Hideo.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am overwhelmed by how serious this group is taking good care of issues.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> For your information, the 'pending fencing action' status disappeared after bringing the nodes offline, and during that I found some gfs2 errors that were fixed by fsck.gfs2, and since then my cluster has been acting very stable.
>>>>> By bringing offline you mean shutting down pacemaker?
>>>> That would be expected as fence-history is kept solely in RAM.
>>>> The history-knowledge is synced between the nodes so the
>>>> history is just lost if all nodes are down at the same time.
>>>> Unfortunately that mechanism keeps unwanted leftovers
>>>> around as well.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Klaus
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> If I can provide more info let me know.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> /Steffen
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 3:45 AM <renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Steffen,
>>>>>> I've been experimenting with it since last weekend,
> but I haven't been able to reproduce the same
> situation.
>>>>>> It seems that the cause is that the reproduction
> method cannot be limited.
>>>>>> Can I attach a problem log?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>> Hideo Yamauchi.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>> From: Klaus Wenninger <kwenning at redhat.com>
>>>>>>> To: Steffen Vinther Sørensen <svinther at gmail.com>; Cluster Labs - All topics related to open-source clustering welcomed <users at clusterlabs.org>
>>>>>>> Cc:
>>>>>>> Date: 2021/1/7, Thu 21:42
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ClusterLabs] Pending Fencing
> Actions shown in pcs status
>>>>>>> On 1/7/21 1:13 PM, Steffen Vinther Sørensen
> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Klaus,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes then the status does sync to the other
> nodes. Also it looks like
>>>>>>>> there are some hostname resolving problems
> in play here, maybe causing
>>>>>>>> problems, here is my notes from restarting
> pacemaker etc.
>>>>>>> Don't think there are hostname resolving
> problems.
>>>>>>> The messages you are seeing, that look as if, are
> caused
>>>>>>> by using -EHOSTUNREACH as error-code to fail a
> pending
>>>>>>> fence action when a node that is just coming up
> sees
>>>>>>> a pending action that is claimed to be handled by
> himself.
>>>>>>> Back then I chose that error-code as there was
> none
>>>>>>> that really matched available right away and it
> was
>>>>>>> urgent for some reason so that introduction of
> something
>>>>>>> new was to risky at that state.
>>>>>>> Probably would make sense to introduce something
> that
>>>>>>> is more descriptive.
>>>>>>> Back then the issue was triggered by fenced
> crashing and
>>>>>>> being restarted - so not a node-restart but just
> fenced
>>>>>>> restarting.
>>>>>>> And it looks as if building the failed-message
> failed somehow.
>>>>>>> So that could be the reason why the pending
> action persists.
>>>>>>> Would be something else then what we solved with
> Bug 5401.
>>>>>>> But what triggers the logs below might as well
> just be a
>>>>>>> follow-up issue after the Bug 5401 thing.
>>>>>>> Will try to find time for a deeper look later
> today.
>>>>>>> Klaus
>>>>>>>> pcs cluster standby kvm03-node02.avigol-gcs.dk
>>>>>>>> pcs cluster stop kvm03-node02.avigol-gcs.dk
>>>>>>>> pcs status
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pending Fencing Actions:
>>>>>>>> * reboot of kvm03-node02.avigol-gcs.dk pending: client=crmd.37819,
>>>>>>>> origin=kvm03-node03.avigol-gcs.dk
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> # From logs on all 3 nodes:
>>>>>>>> Jan 07 12:48:18 kvm03-node03
> stonith-ng[37815]: warning: received
>>>>>>>> pending action we are supposed to be the
> owner but it's not in our
>>>>>>>> records -> fail it
>>>>>>>> Jan 07 12:48:18 kvm03-node03
> stonith-ng[37815]: error: Operation
>>>>>>>> 'reboot' targeting kvm03-node02.avigol-gcs.dk on <no-one> for
>>>>>>>> crmd.37819 at kvm03-node03.avigol-gcs.dk.56a3018c: No route to host
>>>>>>>> Jan 07 12:48:18 kvm03-node03
> stonith-ng[37815]: error:
>>>>>>>> stonith_construct_reply: Triggered assert at
> commands.c:2406 : request
>>>>>>>> != NULL
>>>>>>>> Jan 07 12:48:18 kvm03-node03
> stonith-ng[37815]: warning: Can't create
>>>>>>>> a sane reply
>>>>>>>> Jan 07 12:48:18 kvm03-node03 crmd[37819]:
> notice: Peer
>>>>>>>> kvm03-node02.avigol-gcs.dk was not terminated (reboot) by <anyone> on
>>>>>>>> behalf of crmd.37819: No route to host
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> pcs cluster start kvm03-node02.avigol-gcs.dk
>>>>>>>> pcs status (now outputs the same on all 3
> nodes)
>>>>>>>> Failed Fencing Actions:
>>>>>>>> * reboot of kvm03-node02.avigol-gcs.dk failed: delegate=,
>>>>>>>> client=crmd.37819, origin=kvm03-node03.avigol-gcs.dk,
>>>>>>>> last-failed='Thu Jan 7 12:48:18 2021'
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> pcs cluster unstandby kvm03-node02.avigol-gcs.dk
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> # Now libvirtd refuses to start
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jan 07 12:51:44 kvm03-node02 dnsmasq[20884]:
> read /etc/hosts - 8 addresses
>>>>>>>> Jan 07 12:51:44 kvm03-node02 dnsmasq[20884]:
> read
>>>>>>>> /var/lib/libvirt/dnsmasq/default.addnhosts -
> 0 addresses
>>>>>>>> Jan 07 12:51:44 kvm03-node02
> dnsmasq-dhcp[20884]: read
>>>>>>>> /var/lib/libvirt/dnsmasq/default.hostsfile
>>>>>>>> Jan 07 12:51:44 kvm03-node02
> libvirtd[24091]: 2021-01-07
>>>>>>>> 11:51:44.729+0000: 24160: info : libvirt
> version: 4.5.0, package:
>>>>>>>> 36.el7_9.3 (CentOS BuildSystem <http://bugs.centos.org >,
>>>>>>>> 2020-11-16-16:25:20, x86-01.bsys.centos.org)
>>>>>>>> Jan 07 12:51:44 kvm03-node02
> libvirtd[24091]: 2021-01-07
>>>>>>>> 11:51:44.729+0000: 24160: info : hostname:
> kvm03-node02
>>>>>>>> Jan 07 12:51:44 kvm03-node02
> libvirtd[24091]: 2021-01-07
>>>>>>>> 11:51:44.729+0000: 24160: error :
> qemuMonitorOpenUnix:392 : failed to
>>>>>>>> connect to monitor socket: Connection
> refused
>>>>>>>> Jan 07 12:51:44 kvm03-node02
> libvirtd[24091]: 2021-01-07
>>>>>>>> 11:51:44.729+0000: 24159: error :
> qemuMonitorOpenUnix:392 : failed to
>>>>>>>> connect to monitor socket: Connection
> refused
>>>>>>>> Jan 07 12:51:44 kvm03-node02
> libvirtd[24091]: 2021-01-07
>>>>>>>> 11:51:44.730+0000: 24161: error :
> qemuMonitorOpenUnix:392 : failed to
>>>>>>>> connect to monitor socket: Connection
> refused
>>>>>>>> Jan 07 12:51:44 kvm03-node02
> libvirtd[24091]: 2021-01-07
>>>>>>>> 11:51:44.730+0000: 24162: error :
> qemuMonitorOpenUnix:392 : failed to
>>>>>>>> connect to monitor socket: Connection
> refused
>>>>>>>> pcs status
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Failed Resource Actions:
>>>>>>>> * libvirtd_start_0 on kvm03-node02.avigol-gcs.dk 'unknown error'
>>>>>>> (1):
>>>>>>>> call=142, status=complete, exitreason='',
>>>>>>>> last-rc-change='Thu Jan 7 12:51:44
> 2021', queued=0ms,
>>>>>>> exec=2157ms
>>>>>>>> Failed Fencing Actions:
>>>>>>>> * reboot of kvm03-node02.avigol-gcs.dk failed: delegate=,
>>>>>>>> client=crmd.37819, origin=kvm03-node03.avigol-gcs.dk,
>>>>>>>> last-failed='Thu Jan 7 12:48:18 2021'
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> # from /etc/hosts on all 3 nodes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 172.31.0.31 kvm03-node01 kvm03-node01.avigol-gcs.dk
>>>>>>>> 172.31.0.32 kvm03-node02 kvm03-node02.avigol-gcs.dk
>>>>>>>> 172.31.0.33 kvm03-node03 kvm03-node03.avigol-gcs.dk
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 11:15 AM Klaus
> Wenninger <kwenning at redhat.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Steffen,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you just see the leftover
> pending-action on one node
>>>>>>>>> it would be interesting if restarting of
> pacemaker on
>>>>>>>>> one of the other nodes does sync it to
> all of the
>>>>>>>>> nodes.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Klaus
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 1/7/21 9:54 AM, renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi Steffen,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately not sure about the
> exact scenario. But I have
>>>>>>> been doing
>>>>>>>>>>> some recent experiments with
> node standby/unstandby stop/start.
>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>>>>>> to get procedures right for
> updating node rpms etc.
>>>>>>>>>>> Later I noticed the uncomforting
> "pending fencing
>>>>>>> actions" status msg.
>>>>>>>>>> Okay!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Repeat the standby and unstandby
> steps in the same way to check.
>>>>>>>>>> We will start checking after
> tomorrow, so I think it will take some
>>>>>>> time until next week.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Many thanks,
>>>>>>>>>> Hideo Yamauchi.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>>>>>> From: "renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp"
>>>>>>> <renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp>
>>>>>>>>>>> To: Reid Wahl <nwahl at redhat.com>; Cluster Labs - All
>>>>>>> topics related to open-source clustering welcomed
> <users at clusterlabs.org>
>>>>>>>>>>> Cc:
>>>>>>>>>>> Date: 2021/1/7, Thu 17:51
>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ClusterLabs]
> Pending Fencing Actions shown in pcs
>>>>>>> status
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Steffen,
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Reid,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The fencing history is kept
> inside stonith-ng and is not
>>>>>>> written to cib.
>>>>>>>>>>> However, getting the entire cib
> and getting it sent will help
>>>>>>> you to reproduce
>>>>>>>>>>> the problem.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Hideo Yamauchi.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Reid Wahl <nwahl at redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> To: renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp; Cluster Labs - All topics
>>>>>>> related to
>>>>>>>>>>> open-source clustering welcomed
> <users at clusterlabs.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: 2021/1/7, Thu 17:39
>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ClusterLabs]
> Pending Fencing Actions shown in
>>>>>>> pcs status
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Steffen. Those
> attachments don't contain the CIB.
>>>>>>> They contain the
>>>>>>>>>>> `pcs config` output. You can get
> the cib with `pcs cluster cib
>>>>>>>>>>> $(hostname).cib.xml`.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Granted, it's possible that
> this fence action
>>>>>>> information wouldn't
>>>>>>>>>>> be in the CIB at all. It might
> be stored in fencer memory.
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 12:26
> AM
>>>>>>> <renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Steffen,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here CIB settings
> attached (pcs config show) for
>>>>>>> all 3 of my nodes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (all 3 seems 100%
> identical), node03 is the DC.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for the
> attachment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What is the scenario
> when this situation occurs?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In what steps did the
> problem appear when fencing was
>>>>>>> performed (or
>>>>>>>>>>> failed)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hideo Yamauchi.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message
> -----
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Steffen
> Vinther Sørensen
>>>>>>> <svinther at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp; Cluster Labs - All
>>>>>>> topics related
>>>>>>>>>>> to open-source clustering
> welcomed
>>>>>>> <users at clusterlabs.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: 2021/1/7, Thu
> 17:05
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re:
> [ClusterLabs] Pending Fencing Actions
>>>>>>> shown in pcs
>>>>>>>>>>> status
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Hideo,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here CIB settings
> attached (pcs config show) for
>>>>>>> all 3 of my nodes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (all 3 seems 100%
> identical), node03 is the DC.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Steffen
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 7, 2021
> at 8:06 AM
>>>>>>> <renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Steffen,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Reid,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also checked
> the Centos source rpm and it
>>>>>>> seems to include a
>>>>>>>>>>> fix for the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Steffen
> suggested, if you share your CIB
>>>>>>> settings, I might
>>>>>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If this issue
> is the same as the fix, the
>>>>>>> display will only be
>>>>>>>>>>> displayed on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the DC node and
> will not affect the operation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The pending
> actions shown will remain for a
>>>>>>> long time, but
>>>>>>>>>>> will not have a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> negative impact on
> the cluster.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hideo
> Yamauchi.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original
> Message -----
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > From:
> Reid Wahl <nwahl at redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > To:
> Cluster Labs - All topics related to
>>>>>>> open-source
>>>>>>>>>>> clustering
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> welcomed <users at clusterlabs.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Cc:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Date:
> 2021/1/7, Thu 15:58
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Subject:
> Re: [ClusterLabs] Pending
>>>>>>> Fencing Actions shown
>>>>>>>>>>> in pcs status
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > It's
> supposedly fixed in that
>>>>>>> version.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > -
>>>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1787749
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > -
>>>>>>> https://access.redhat.com/solutions/4713471
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > So you
> may be hitting a different issue
>>>>>>> (unless
>>>>>>>>>>> there's a bug in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > pcmk 1.1
> backport of the fix).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I may be
> a little bit out of my area of
>>>>>>> knowledge here,
>>>>>>>>>>> but can you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > share the
> CIBs from nodes 1 and 3? Maybe
>>>>>>> Hideo, Klaus, or
>>>>>>>>>>> Ken has some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > insight.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > On Wed,
> Jan 6, 2021 at 10:53 PM Steffen
>>>>>>> Vinther Sørensen
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > <svinther at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Hi
> Hideo,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> If
> the fix is not going to make it
>>>>>>> into the CentOS7
>>>>>>>>>>> pacemaker
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> I
> guess the stable approach to take
>>>>>>> advantage of it
>>>>>>>>>>> is to build
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
> cluster on another OS than CentOS7
>>>>>>> ? A little late
>>>>>>>>>>> for that in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> case
> though :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
> Regards
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
> Steffen
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> On
> Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 7:27 AM
>>>>>>>>>>> <renayama19661014 at ybb.ne.jp>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> Hi Steffen,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> The fix pointed out by Reid is
>>>>>>> affecting it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> Since the fencing action
>>>>>>> requested by the DC
>>>>>>>>>>> node exists
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > DC node,
> such an event occurs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> You will need to take
>>>>>>> advantage of the modified
>>>>>>>>>>> pacemaker to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resolve
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > the
> issue.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> Hideo Yamauchi.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > From: Reid Wahl
>>>>>>> <nwahl at redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > To: Cluster Labs - All
>>>>>>> topics related to
>>>>>>>>>>> open-source
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clustering
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > welcomed
> <users at clusterlabs.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > Cc:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > Date: 2021/1/7, Thu 15:07
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > Subject: Re:
>>>>>>> [ClusterLabs] Pending Fencing
>>>>>>>>>>> Actions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shown in pcs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > status
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > Hi, Steffen. Are your
>>>>>>> cluster nodes all
>>>>>>>>>>> running the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> same
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Pacemaker
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > versions? This looks like
>>>>>>> Bug 5401[1],
>>>>>>>>>>> which is fixed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by upstream
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > commit df71a07[2].
>>>>>>> I'm a little bit
>>>>>>>>>>> confused about
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > only
> shows
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > up on one out of three
>>>>>>> nodes though.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > [1]
>>>>>>>>>>> https://bugs.clusterlabs.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5401
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > [2]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pacemaker/commit/df71a07
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at
>>>>>>> 8:31 AM Steffen
>>>>>>>>>>> Vinther Sørensen
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >
>>>>>>> <svinther at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >> Hello
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >> node 1 is showing
>>>>>>> this in 'pcs
>>>>>>>>>>> status'
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >> Pending Fencing
>>>>>>> Actions:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >> * reboot of
>>>>>>>>>>> kvm03-node02.avigol-gcs.dk pending:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
> client=crmd.37819,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >>
>>>>>>> origin=kvm03-node03.avigol-gcs.dk
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >> node 2 and node 3
>>>>>>> outputs no such
>>>>>>>>>>> thing (node 3 is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DC)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >> Google is not much
>>>>>>> help, how to
>>>>>>>>>>> investigate this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> further and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > get rid
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >> of such terrifying
>>>>>>> status message ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >> Regards
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >> Steffen
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>
> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >> Manage your
>>>>>>> subscription:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >> ClusterLabs home:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.clusterlabs.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > Reid Wahl, RHCA
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > Senior Software
>>>>>>> Maintenance Engineer, Red
>>>>>>>>>>> Hat
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > CEE - Platform Support
>>>>>>> Delivery -
>>>>>>>>>>> ClusterHA
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >
>>>>>>>>>>>
> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > Manage your subscription:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >
>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> > ClusterLabs home:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.clusterlabs.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> Manage your subscription:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
> ClusterLabs home:
>>>>>>> https://www.clusterlabs.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
> Manage your subscription:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
> ClusterLabs home:
>>>>>>> https://www.clusterlabs.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Reid
> Wahl, RHCA
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Senior
> Software Maintenance Engineer,
>>>>>>> Red Hat
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > CEE -
> Platform Support Delivery -
>>>>>>> ClusterHA
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Manage
> your subscription:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
> ClusterLabs home:
>>>>>>> https://www.clusterlabs.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Manage your
> subscription:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ClusterLabs
> home:
>>>>>>> https://www.clusterlabs.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Manage your
> subscription:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Reid Wahl, RHCA
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Software Maintenance
> Engineer, Red Hat
>>>>>>>>>>>> CEE - Platform Support
> Delivery - ClusterHA
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> Manage your subscription:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> Manage your subscription:
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
>>>>>>>>>
> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Manage your subscription:
>>>>>>>>> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Manage your subscription:
>>>>>>> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>
More information about the Users
mailing list