[Pacemaker] [Partially SOLVED] pacemaker/dlm problems

[Vladislav Bogdanov]

17.01.2012 04:01, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Vladislav Bogdanov
> <bubble at hoster-ok.com> wrote:
>> 16.01.2012 09:20, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>>> At the same time, stonith_admin -B succeeds.
>>>>> The main difference I see is st_opt_sync_call in a latter case.
>>>>> Will try to experiment with it.
>>>>
>>>> Yeeeesssss!!!
>>>>
>>>> Now I see following:
>>>> Dec 19 11:53:34 vd01-a cluster-dlm: [2474]: info:
>>>> pacemaker_terminate_member: Requesting that node 1090782474/vd01-b be fenced
>>>
>>> So the important question... what did you change?
>>
>> Nice you're back ;)
>>
>> + rc = st->cmds->fence(st, *st_opt_sync_call*, node_uname, "reboot", 120);
> 
> Really struggling to see how changing anything here can impact whether
> the log message /before/ it gets printed.

Did I say it? ;)

Line of the interest here is not

Dec 19 11:53:34 vd01-a cluster-dlm: [2474]: info:
pacemaker_terminate_member: Requesting that node 1090782474/vd01-b be fenced

which was added by me it that function, but the next one:

Dec 19 11:53:34 vd01-a stonith-ng: [1905]: info:
initiate_remote_stonith_op: Initiating remote operation reboot for
vd01-b: 21425fc0-4311-40fa-9647-525c3f258471

which indicates that fencing is fired (and the rest).

> 
>>
>> attaching my resulting version of pacemaker.c (which still has a lot of
>> mess because of different approaches I tried to get the result and needs
>> a cleanup). Function you may look at is pacemaker_terminate_member()
>> which is almost one-to-one copy of crm_terminate_member_no_mainloop()
>> except rename of variable to compile without warnings and change of
>> ->fence() arguments.
>>
>>>
>>>> Dec 19 11:53:34 vd01-a stonith-ng: [1905]: info:
>>>> initiate_remote_stonith_op: Initiating remote operation reboot for
>>>> vd01-b: 21425fc0-4311-40fa-9647-525c3f258471
>>>> Dec 19 11:53:34 vd01-a stonith-ng: [1905]: info: crm_get_peer: Node
>>>> vd01-c now has id: 1107559690
>>>> Dec 19 11:53:34 vd01-a stonith-ng: [1905]: info: stonith_command:
>>>> Processed st_query from vd01-c: rc=0
>>>> Dec 19 11:53:34 vd01-a stonith-ng: [1905]: info: crm_get_peer: Node
>>>> vd01-d now has id: 1124336906
>>>> Dec 19 11:53:34 vd01-a stonith-ng: [1905]: info: stonith_command:
>>>> Processed st_query from vd01-d: rc=0
>>>> Dec 19 11:53:34 vd01-a stonith-ng: [1905]: info: stonith_command:
>>>> Processed st_query from vd01-a: rc=0
>>>> Dec 19 11:53:34 vd01-a stonith-ng: [1905]: info: call_remote_stonith:
>>>> Requesting that vd01-c perform op reboot vd01-b
>>>> Dec 19 11:53:34 vd01-a stonith-ng: [1905]: info: crm_get_peer: Node
>>>> vd01-b now has id: 1090782474
>>>> ...
>>>> Dec 19 11:53:40 vd01-a stonith-ng: [1905]: info: stonith_command:
>>>> Processed st_fence_history from cluster-dlm: rc=0
>>>> Dec 19 11:53:40 vd01-a crmd: [1910]: info: tengine_stonith_notify: Peer
>>>> vd01-b was terminated (reboot) by vd01-c for vd01-a
>>>> (ref=21425fc0-4311-40fa-9647-525c3f258471): OK
>>>>
>>>> But, then I see minor issue that node is marked to be fenced again:
>>>> Dec 19 11:53:40 vd01-a pengine: [1909]: WARN: pe_fence_node: Node vd01-b
>>>> will be fenced because it is un-expectedly down
>>>
>>> Do you have logs for that?
>>> tengine_stonith_notify() got called, that should have been enough to
>>> get the node cleaned up in the cib.
>>
>> Ugh, seems like yes, but they are archived already. Will get them back
>> to nodes and try to compose hb_report for them (but pe inputs are
>> already lost, do you still need logs without them?)
>>
>>>
>>>> ...
>>>> Dec 19 11:53:40 vd01-a pengine: [1909]: WARN: stage6: Scheduling Node
>>>> vd01-b for STONITH
>>>> ...
>>>> Dec 19 11:53:40 vd01-a crmd: [1910]: info: te_fence_node: Executing
>>>> reboot fencing operation (249) on vd01-b (timeout=60000)
>>>> ...
>>>> Dec 19 11:53:40 vd01-a stonith-ng: [1905]: info: call_remote_stonith:
>>>> Requesting that vd01-c perform op reboot vd01-b
>>>>
>>>> And so on.
>>>>
>>>> I can't investigated this one in more depth, because I use fence_xvm in
>>>> this testing cluster, and it has issues when running more than one
>>>> stonith resource on a node. Also, my RA (in a cluster where this testing
>>>> cluster runs) undefines VM after failure, so fence_xvm does not see
>>>> fencing victim in a qpid and is unable to fence it again.
>>>>
>>>> May be it is possible to look if node was just fenced and skip redundant
>>>> fencing?
>>>
>>> If the callbacks are being used correctly, it shouldn't be required
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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