[Pacemaker] Pacemaker/corosync freeze
Attila Megyeri
amegyeri at minerva-soft.com
Wed Mar 12 17:27:19 EDT 2014
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Friesse [mailto:jfriesse at redhat.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 4:31 PM
> To: The Pacemaker cluster resource manager
> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Pacemaker/corosync freeze
>
> Attila Megyeri napsal(a):
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Jan Friesse [mailto:jfriesse at redhat.com]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 2:27 PM
> >> To: The Pacemaker cluster resource manager
> >> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Pacemaker/corosync freeze
> >>
> >> Attila Megyeri napsal(a):
> >>> Hello Jan,
> >>>
> >>> Thank you very much for your help so far.
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Jan Friesse [mailto:jfriesse at redhat.com]
> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 9:51 AM
> >>>> To: The Pacemaker cluster resource manager
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Pacemaker/corosync freeze
> >>>>
> >>>> Attila Megyeri napsal(a):
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>> From: Andrew Beekhof [mailto:andrew at beekhof.net]
> >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 10:27 PM
> >>>>>> To: The Pacemaker cluster resource manager
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Pacemaker/corosync freeze
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 12 Mar 2014, at 1:54 am, Attila Megyeri
> >>>>>> <amegyeri at minerva-soft.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>>>> From: Andrew Beekhof [mailto:andrew at beekhof.net]
> >>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 12:48 AM
> >>>>>>>> To: The Pacemaker cluster resource manager
> >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Pacemaker/corosync freeze
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 7 Mar 2014, at 5:54 pm, Attila Megyeri
> >>>>>>>> <amegyeri at minerva-soft.com>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for the quick response!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>>>>>>> From: Andrew Beekhof [mailto:andrew at beekhof.net]
> >>>>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, March 07, 2014 3:48 AM
> >>>>>>>>>> To: The Pacemaker cluster resource manager
> >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Pacemaker/corosync freeze
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On 7 Mar 2014, at 5:31 am, Attila Megyeri
> >>>>>>>>>> <amegyeri at minerva-soft.com>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> We have a strange issue with Corosync/Pacemaker.
> >>>>>>>>>>> From time to time, something unexpected happens and
> >> suddenly
> >>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>> crm_mon output remains static.
> >>>>>>>>>>> When I check the cpu usage, I see that one of the cores uses
> >>>>>>>>>>> 100% cpu, but
> >>>>>>>>>> cannot actually match it to either the corosync or one of the
> >>>>>>>>>> pacemaker processes.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> In such a case, this high CPU usage is happening on all 7 nodes.
> >>>>>>>>>>> I have to manually go to each node, stop pacemaker, restart
> >>>>>>>>>>> corosync, then
> >>>>>>>>>> start pacemeker. Stoping pacemaker and corosync does not
> work
> >>>>>>>>>> in most of the cases, usually a kill -9 is needed.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Using corosync 2.3.0, pacemaker 1.1.10 on Ubuntu trusty.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Using udpu as transport, two rings on Gigabit ETH, rro_mode
> >>>> passive.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Logs are usually flooded with CPG related messages, such as:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Mar 06 18:10:49 [1316] ctsip1 crmd: info: crm_cs_flush:
> >> Sent
> >>>> 0
> >>>>>>>> CPG
> >>>>>>>>>> messages (1 remaining, last=8): Try again (6)
> >>>>>>>>>>> Mar 06 18:10:49 [1316] ctsip1 crmd: info: crm_cs_flush:
> >> Sent
> >>>> 0
> >>>>>>>> CPG
> >>>>>>>>>> messages (1 remaining, last=8): Try again (6)
> >>>>>>>>>>> Mar 06 18:10:50 [1316] ctsip1 crmd: info: crm_cs_flush:
> >> Sent
> >>>> 0
> >>>>>>>> CPG
> >>>>>>>>>> messages (1 remaining, last=8): Try again (6)
> >>>>>>>>>>> Mar 06 18:10:50 [1316] ctsip1 crmd: info: crm_cs_flush:
> >> Sent
> >>>> 0
> >>>>>>>> CPG
> >>>>>>>>>> messages (1 remaining, last=8): Try again (6)
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> OR
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Mar 06 17:46:24 [1341] ctdb1 cib: info: crm_cs_flush:
> >> Sent 0
> >>>>>> CPG
> >>>>>>>>>> messages (1 remaining, last=10933): Try again (
> >>>>>>>>>>> Mar 06 17:46:24 [1341] ctdb1 cib: info: crm_cs_flush:
> >> Sent 0
> >>>>>> CPG
> >>>>>>>>>> messages (1 remaining, last=10933): Try again (
> >>>>>>>>>>> Mar 06 17:46:24 [1341] ctdb1 cib: info: crm_cs_flush:
> >> Sent 0
> >>>>>> CPG
> >>>>>>>>>> messages (1 remaining, last=10933): Try again (
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> That is usually a symptom of corosync getting into a horribly
> >>>>>>>>>> confused
> >>>>>>>> state.
> >>>>>>>>>> Version? Distro? Have you checked for an update?
> >>>>>>>>>> Odd that the user of all that CPU isn't showing up though.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> As I wrote I use Ubuntu trusty, the exact package versions are:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> corosync 2.3.0-1ubuntu5
> >>>>>>>>> pacemaker 1.1.10+git20130802-1ubuntu2
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Ah sorry, I seem to have missed that part.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> There are no updates available. The only option is to install
> >>>>>>>>> from sources,
> >>>>>>>> but that would be very difficult to maintain and I'm not sure I
> >>>>>>>> would get rid of this issue.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> What do you recommend?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The same thing as Lars, or switch to a distro that stays
> >>>>>>>> current with upstream (git shows 5 newer releases for that
> >>>>>>>> branch since it was released 3 years ago).
> >>>>>>>> If you do build from source, its probably best to go with
> >>>>>>>> v1.4.6
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hm, I am a bit confused here. We are using 2.3.0,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I swapped the 2 for a 1 somehow. A bit distracted, sorry.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I upgraded all nodes to 2.3.3 and first it seemed a bit better,
> >>>>> but still the
> >>>> same issue - after some time CPU gets to 100%, and the corosync log
> >>>> is flooded with messages like:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Mar 12 07:36:55 [4793] ctdb2 cib: info: crm_cs_flush: Sent 0
> CPG
> >>>> messages (48 remaining, last=3671): Try again (6)
> >>>>> Mar 12 07:36:55 [4798] ctdb2 crmd: info: crm_cs_flush: Sent 0
> >> CPG
> >>>> messages (51 remaining, last=3995): Try again (6)
> >>>>> Mar 12 07:36:56 [4793] ctdb2 cib: info: crm_cs_flush: Sent 0
> CPG
> >>>> messages (48 remaining, last=3671): Try again (6)
> >>>>> Mar 12 07:36:56 [4798] ctdb2 crmd: info: crm_cs_flush: Sent 0
> >> CPG
> >>>> messages (51 remaining, last=3995): Try again (6)
> >>>>> Mar 12 07:36:57 [4793] ctdb2 cib: info: crm_cs_flush: Sent 0
> CPG
> >>>> messages (48 remaining, last=3671): Try again (6)
> >>>>> Mar 12 07:36:57 [4798] ctdb2 crmd: info: crm_cs_flush: Sent 0
> >> CPG
> >>>> messages (51 remaining, last=3995): Try again (6)
> >>>>> Mar 12 07:36:57 [4793] ctdb2 cib: info: crm_cs_flush: Sent 0
> CPG
> >>>> messages (48 remaining, last=3671): Try again (6)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Attila,
> >>>>
> >>>>> Shall I try to downgrade to 1.4.6? What is the difference in that
> >>>>> build? Or
> >>>> where should I start troubleshooting?
> >>>>
> >>>> First of all, 1.x branch (flatiron) is maintained so even it looks
> >>>> like a old version, it's quite a new. It contains more or less only
> bugfixes.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> OK - The next thing I will try will be to downgrade to 1.4.6 if the
> >> troubleshooting does not bring us closer.
> >>> Actually we have a couple of clusters running 1.4.2, but stack is "openais"
> >> not corosync. Currently we use "corosync".
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> 2.x branch (needle) contains not only bugfixes but also new features.
> >>>>
> >>>> Keep in mind that with 1.x you need to use cman as quorum provider
> >>>> (2.x contains quorum in base).
> >>>>
> >>>> There are no big differences in build.
> >>>>
> >>>> But back to your original question. Of course troubleshooting is
> >>>> always better.
> >>>>
> >>>> Try again error (6) is happening when corosync is in sync state.
> >>>> This is happening when NEW node is discovered, there is network
> >>>> split/merge and usually takes only few milliseconds. Usually
> >>>> problem you are hitting is caused by some network issue.
> >>>
> >>> I can confirm this. The 100% cpu issue happens when I restart one of
> >>> the
> >> nodes. It seems that it is happening when a given node comes backup
> >> up and a new membership is about to be formed.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> So first of all take a look to corosync.log
> >>>> (/var/log/cluster/corosync.log). Do you see some warning/error there?
> >>>
> >>> Not really. I reproduced a case so you can see for yourself.
> >>> Initially I had a stable cluster.
> >>> At 10:42:39 I did a reboot on the "ctsip1" node. All was fine until
> >>> the node
> >> came back up (around 10:43:00). At this point, the cpu usage went to
> >> 100% and corosync stopped working properly.
> >>>
> >>> here is the relevant corosync.log: http://pastebin.com/HJENEdZj
> >>>
> >>
> >> Is that log file somehow continue? I mean, interesting is:
> >> Mar 12 10:43:00 [973] ctdb2 corosync notice [TOTEM ] A new
> >> membership
> >> (10.9.1.3:1592) was formed. Members joined: 168362281
> >
> > That was all what I sent. From 43:00 the corosync process appears to be
> irresponsive. One of the cores was at 100% cpu, but from htop, top or similar
> apps it is impossible to gues which app it is. Of course, killing corosync with -9
> lowers the cpu usage.
> >
>
> That sounds very bad.
>
>
> >>
> >> What means new membership and sync is now running but there is no
> >> counterpart (which looks like:
> >>
> >> Mar 12 10:42:40 [973] ctdb2 corosync notice [MAIN ] Completed
> >> service synchronization, ready to provide service. ).
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Can you please try remove rrp and use pure srp?
> >
> > If I understand correctly, you are asking me to remove the redundant link
> (the second interface block from the .conf) completely, right?
> >
>
> Yes, exactly. I don't think it will help but it's at least good to try.
>
>
> >
> >>
> >> Also can you please try to set debug: on in corosync.conf and paste
> >> full corosync.log then?
> >
> > I set debug to on, and did a few restarts but could not reproduce the issue
> yet - will post the logs as soon as I manage to reproduce.
> >
>
> Perfect.
>
> Another option you can try to set is netmtu (1200 is usually safe).
Finally I was able to reproduce the issue.
I restarted node ctsip2 at 21:10:14, and CPU went 100% immediately (not when node was up again).
The corosync log with debug on is available at: http://pastebin.com/kTpDqqtm
To be honest, I had to wait much longer for this reproduction as before, even though there was no change in the corosync configuration - just potentially some system updates. But anyway, the issue is unfortunately still there.
Previously, when this issue came, cpu was at 100% on all nodes - this time only on ctmgr, which was the DC...
I hope you can find some useful details in the log.
Thanks,
Attila
>
> Regards,
> Honza
>
> >
> > There are also a few things that might or might not be related:
> >
> > 1) Whenever I want to edit the configuration with "crm configure edit",
> upon save I get a similar error:
> > " ERROR: 47: duplicate element cib-bootstrap-options
> > Do you want to edit again? "
> > But there is no such duplicate elment as far as I can tell. This might be a
> crmsh issue, and not related to corosync at all, just mentioning.
> >
> > 2)
> > "Mar 11 21:31:11 [4797] ctdb2 pengine: error: process_pe_message:
> Calculated Transition 27: /var/lib/pacemaker/pengine/pe-error-7.bz2
> > Mar 11 21:31:11 [4797] ctdb2 pengine: notice: process_pe_message:
> Configuration ERRORs found during PE processing. Please run "crm_verify -L"
> to identify issues."
> >
> > But crm_veryfy -L shows no problems at all...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Honza
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> What transport are you using? Multicast (udp) or unicast (udpu)?
> >>>>
> >>>> Can you please paste your corosync.conf?
> >>>
> >>> We use udpu, since the servers are in different subnets and
> >>> multicast did
> >> not work as expected. (In our other systems we use multicast).
> >>>
> >>> The corosync.conf is at: http://pastebin.com/dMivQJn5
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thank you in advance,
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Attila
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>> Honza
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thank you in advance.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> which was released approx. a year ago (you mention 3 years) and
> >>>>>>> you
> >>>>>> recommend 1.4.6, which is a rather old version.
> >>>>>>> Could you please clarify a bit? :) Lars recommends 2.3.3 git tree.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I might end up trying both, but just want to make sure I am not
> >>>>>> misunderstanding something badly.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thank you!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> HTOP show something like this (sorted by TIME+ descending):
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1 [||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||100.0%]
> >> Tasks:
> >>>> 59,
> >>>>>> 4
> >>>>>>>>>> thr; 2 running
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2 [| 0.7%] Load average: 1.00 0.99 1.02
> >>>>>>>>>>> Mem[|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 165/994MB]
> >>>> Uptime: 1
> >>>>>>>>>> day, 10:22:03
> >>>>>>>>>>> Swp[ 0/509MB]
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> PID USER PRI NI VIRT RES SHR S CPU% MEM% TIME+
> >>>> Command
> >>>>>>>>>>> 921 root 20 0 188M 49220 33856 R 0.0 4.8 3h33:58
> >>>>>>>> /usr/sbin/corosync
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1277 snmp 20 0 45708 4248 1472 S 0.0 0.4 1:33.07
> >>>>>> /usr/sbin/snmpd
> >>>>>>>> -
> >>>>>>>>>> Lsd -Lf /dev/null -u snmp -g snm
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1311 hacluster 20 0 109M 16160 9640 S 0.0 1.6 1:12.71
> >>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/pacemaker/cib
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1312 root 20 0 104M 7484 3780 S 0.0 0.7 0:38.06
> >>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/pacemaker/stonithd
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1611 root -2 0 4408 2356 2000 S 0.0 0.2 0:24.15
> >>>>>> /usr/sbin/watchdog
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1316 hacluster 20 0 122M 9756 5924 S 0.0 1.0 0:22.62
> >>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/pacemaker/crmd
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1313 root 20 0 81784 3800 2876 S 0.0 0.4 0:18.64
> >>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/pacemaker/lrmd
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1314 hacluster 20 0 96616 4132 2604 S 0.0 0.4 0:16.01
> >>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/pacemaker/attrd
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1309 root 20 0 104M 4804 2580 S 0.0 0.5 0:15.56
> >> pacemakerd
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1250 root 20 0 33000 1192 928 S 0.0 0.1 0:13.59 ha_logd:
> >> read
> >>>>>>>> process
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1315 hacluster 20 0 73892 2652 1952 S 0.0 0.3 0:13.25
> >>>>>>>>>> /usr/lib/pacemaker/pengine
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1252 root 20 0 33000 712 456 S 0.0 0.1 0:13.03 ha_logd:
> >> write
> >>>>>>>> process
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1835 ntp 20 0 27216 1980 1408 S 0.0 0.2 0:11.80
> >>>> /usr/sbin/ntpd -
> >>>>>> p
> >>>>>>>>>> /var/run/ntpd.pid -g -u 105:112
> >>>>>>>>>>> 899 root 20 0 19168 700 488 S 0.0 0.1 0:09.75
> >>>>>> /usr/sbin/irqbalance
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1642 root 20 0 30696 1556 912 S 0.0 0.2 0:06.49
> >>>> /usr/bin/monit -c
> >>>>>>>>>> /etc/monit/monitrc
> >>>>>>>>>>> 4374 kamailio 20 0 291M 7272 2188 S 0.0 0.7 0:02.77
> >>>>>>>>>> /usr/local/sbin/kamailio -f /etc/kamailio/kamaili
> >>>>>>>>>>> 3079 root 0 -20 16864 4592 3508 S 0.0 0.5 0:01.51
> >> /usr/bin/atop
> >>>> -a
> >>>>>> -
> >>>>>>>> w
> >>>>>>>>>> /var/log/atop/atop_20140306 6
> >>>>>>>>>>> 445 syslog 20 0 249M 6276 976 S 0.0 0.6 0:01.16 rsyslogd
> >>>>>>>>>>> 4373 kamailio 20 0 291M 7492 2396 S 0.0 0.7 0:01.03
> >>>>>>>>>> /usr/local/sbin/kamailio -f /etc/kamailio/kamaili
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1 root 20 0 33376 2632 1404 S 0.0 0.3 0:00.63 /sbin/init
> >>>>>>>>>>> 453 syslog 20 0 249M 6276 976 S 0.0 0.6 0:00.63 rsyslogd
> >>>>>>>>>>> 451 syslog 20 0 249M 6276 976 S 0.0 0.6 0:00.53 rsyslogd
> >>>>>>>>>>> 4379 kamailio 20 0 291M 6224 1132 S 0.0 0.6 0:00.38
> >>>>>>>>>> /usr/local/sbin/kamailio -f /etc/kamailio/kamaili
> >>>>>>>>>>> 4380 kamailio 20 0 291M 8516 3084 S 0.0 0.8 0:00.38
> >>>>>>>>>> /usr/local/sbin/kamailio -f /etc/kamailio/kamaili
> >>>>>>>>>>> 4381 kamailio 20 0 291M 8252 2828 S 0.0 0.8 0:00.37
> >>>>>>>>>> /usr/local/sbin/kamailio -f /etc/kamailio/kamaili
> >>>>>>>>>>> 23315 root 20 0 24872 2476 1412 R 0.7 0.2 0:00.37 htop
> >>>>>>>>>>> 4367 kamailio 20 0 291M 10000 4864 S 0.0 1.0 0:00.36
> >>>>>>>>>> /usr/local/sbin/kamailio -f /etc/kamailio/kamaili
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> My questions:
> >>>>>>>>>>> - Is this a cororync or pacameker issue?
> >>>>>>>>>>> - What are the CPG messages? Is it possible that we have a
> >> firewall
> >>>>>>>> issue?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Any hints would be great!
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>> Attila
> >>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>>>>> 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
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>> 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
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> 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
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
More information about the Pacemaker
mailing list