On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 11:03:36AM -0400, Kovacs, Corey J. wrote: > Sorry about the previous message subject, too lazy to type the address and > didn't change the subject. > > On one hand I agree with that, however I've gone as far as to set up static > routes for the addresses and lock_gulmd won't start at all since it can't > talk to the other lock servers at all. As I said in the original message, > 'gulm_tool nodelist node1' reports that the lock manager on node3 is NOT > using the directed interface but node2 and node1 are. maybe. but it really looks like the gulm on node3 is miss-configuring itself. So look in syslog when you start lock_gulmd on that node, it prints what it thinks the hostname and ip is. If its picking hte wrong one there, gulm is reading the config wrong. You can run lock_gulmd with the -C option, and it will just parse config data and dump it out in /tmp/Gulm_config.?????? (the ? will be random chars.) Look at that to see if it looks like what you've configured. And, I'd like to see the complete nodes.ccs, if you don't mind. -- Michael Conrad Tadpol Tilstra Push to test. <click> Release to detonate.
Attachment:
pgpHPvoydTJzk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
