[Pacemaker] Removed nodes showing back in status

[David Vossel]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Larry Brigman" <larry.brigman at gmail.com>
> To: "The Pacemaker cluster resource manager" <pacemaker at oss.clusterlabs.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 5:27:21 PM
> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Removed nodes showing back in status
> 
> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Larry Brigman
> <larry.brigman at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 1:53 PM, David Vossel <dvossel at redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: "Larry Brigman" <larry.brigman at gmail.com>
> >>> To: "The Pacemaker cluster resource manager"
> >>> <pacemaker at oss.clusterlabs.org>
> >>> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 4:59:55 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Removed nodes showing back in status
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 2:13 PM, David Vossel
> >>> <dvossel at redhat.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > ----- Original Message -----
> >>> >> From: "Larry Brigman" <larry.brigman at gmail.com>
> >>> >> To: "The Pacemaker cluster resource manager"
> >>> >> <pacemaker at oss.clusterlabs.org>
> >>> >> Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 1:30:22 PM
> >>> >> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Removed nodes showing back in status
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Larry Brigman
> >>> >> <larry.brigman at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >> > I have a 5 node cluster (but it could be any number of
> >>> >> > nodes, 3
> >>> >> > or
> >>> >> > larger).
> >>> >> > I am testing some scripts for node removal.
> >>> >> > I remove a node from the cluster and everything looks
> >>> >> > correct
> >>> >> > from
> >>> >> > crm
> >>> >> > status standpoint.
> >>> >> > When I remove a second node, the first node that was removed
> >>> >> > now
> >>> >> > shows back
> >>> >> > in the crm status as off-line.  I'm following the guidelines
> >>> >> > provided
> >>> >> > in Pacemaker Explained docs.
> >>> >> > http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html/Pacemaker_Explained/s-node-delete.html
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > I believe this is a bug but want to put it out to the list
> >>> >> > to be
> >>> >> > sure.
> >>> >> > Versions.
> >>> >> > RHEL5.7 x86_64
> >>> >> > corosync-1.4.2
> >>> >> > openais-1.1.3
> >>> >> > pacemaker-1.1.5
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Status after first node removed
> >>> >> > [root at portland-3 ~]# crm status
> >>> >> > ============
> >>> >> > Last updated: Mon May 14 08:42:04 2012
> >>> >> > Stack: openais
> >>> >> > Current DC: portland-1 - partition with quorum
> >>> >> > Version:
> >>> >> > 1.1.5-1.3.sme-01e86afaaa6d4a8c4836f68df80ababd6ca3902f
> >>> >> > 4 Nodes configured, 4 expected votes
> >>> >> > 0 Resources configured.
> >>> >> > ============
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Online: [ portland-1 portland-2 portland-3 portland-4 ]
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Status after second node removed.
> >>> >> > [root at portland-3 ~]# crm status
> >>> >> > ============
> >>> >> > Last updated: Mon May 14 08:42:45 2012
> >>> >> > Stack: openais
> >>> >> > Current DC: portland-1 - partition with quorum
> >>> >> > Version:
> >>> >> > 1.1.5-1.3.sme-01e86afaaa6d4a8c4836f68df80ababd6ca3902f
> >>> >> > 4 Nodes configured, 3 expected votes
> >>> >> > 0 Resources configured.
> >>> >> > ============
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Online: [ portland-1 portland-3 portland-4 ]
> >>> >> > OFFLINE: [ portland-5 ]
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Both nodes were removed from the cluster from node 1.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> When I added a node back into the cluster the second node
> >>> >> that was removed now shows as offline.
> >>> >
> >>> > The only time I've seen this sort of behavior is when I don't
> >>> > completely shutdown corosync and pacemaker on the node I'm
> >>> > removing before I delete it's configuration from the cib.  Are
> >>> > you
> >>> > sure corosync and pacemaker are gone before you delete the node
> >>> > from the cluster config?
> >>>
> >>> Well, I run service pacemaker stop and service corosync stop
> >>> prior to
> >>> doing
> >>> the remove.  Since I am doing it all in a script it's possible
> >>> that
> >>> there
> >>> is a race condition that I have just expose or the services are
> >>> not
> >>> fully down
> >>> when the service script exits.
> >>
> >> Yep, If you are waiting for the service scripts to return I would
> >> expect it to be safe to remove the nodes at that point.
> >>
> >>> BTW, I'm running pacemaker as it's own process instead of being a
> >>> child of
> >>> corosync (if that makes a difference).
> >>>
> >>
> >> This shouldn't matter.
> >>
> >> An hb_report of this will help us distinguish if this is a bug or
> >> not.
> > Bug opened with the hb and crm reports.
> > https://developerbugs.linuxfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2648
> >
> 
> I just tried something that seem to point that things are still
> around somewhere
> in the cib.  I stopped and pacemaker.  This causes both removed nodes
> to show back in pacemaker as offline.  Looks like the cluster's from
> scratch
> documentation to remove a node doesn't work correctly.

Interesting, thanks for generating the logs.  I'll look through them when I get a chance.

> BTW which is the best place to file the bugs?  Clusterlabs or
> Linuxfoundations?

We are tracking pacemaker issues here, http://bugs.clusterlabs.org/. Please re-locate the issue.

-- Vossel