Sorry, the description of the build is supposed to say RHEL3 update 4 ... -----Original Message----- From: linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kovacs, Corey J. Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 3:54 PM To: mtilstra@xxxxxxxxxx; linux clustering Subject: RE: usedev directive not working correctly? It's been a while since I lst dealt with this issue. Shortly after I posted this problem I was put on another issue... Alas, here I am again.... I've rebuilt the cluster from the ground up in a clean state. RHEL2 update 4, with GFS 6.0.2-25 re-compiled for these machines. Here are my configs.... #/etc/hosts 10.0.0.1 clua 10.0.0.2 club 10.0.0.3 cluc 192.168.0.1 clua-ic 192.168.0.2 club-ic 192.168.0.3 cluc-ic cluster { name = "cluster" lock_gulm { servers = ["clua", "club", "cluc"] } } nodes { clua { ip_interfaces { eth1 = "192.168.0.1" } usedev="eth1" fence { iLO { clua-ilo { action="reboot" } } } } club { ip_interfaces { eth1 = "192.168.0.2" } usedev="eth1" fence { iLO { club-ilo { action="reboot" } } } } cluc { ip_interfaces { eth1 = "192.168.0.3" } usedev="eth1" fence { iLO { cluc-ilo { action="reboot" } } } } } fence_devices { clua-ilo { agent="fence_ilo" hostname = "10.0.0.10" login = "xxxxx" passwd = "yyyyyy" } club-ilo { agent="fence_ilo" hostname = "10.0.0.11" login = "xxxxx" passwd = "yyyyyy" } cluc-ilo { agent="fence_ilo" hostname = "10.0.0.12" login = "xxxxx" passwd = "yyyyyy" } } when I run lock_gulmd -C against this config (after doing a ccs_tool create) I get the following output cluster { name="cluster" lock_gulm { heartbeat_rate = 15.000 allowed_misses = 2 coreport = 40040 new_connection_timeout = 15.000 # server cnt: 3 # servers = ["clua", "club", "cluc"] servers = ["10.0.0.1", "10.0.0.2", "10.0.0.3"] lt_partitions = 1 lt_base_port = 41040 lt_high_locks = 1048576 lt_drop_req_rate = 10 prealloc_locks = 90000 prealloc_holders = 130000 prealloc_lkrqs = 60 ltpx_port = 40042 } } So, the question is, what am I doing blatently wrong? The docs seem fairly simple but this is just not working for me... Any suggestions would be appreciated and acted upon much quicker this time. Thanks Corey -----Original Message----- From: linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael Conrad Tadpol Tilstra Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 11:41 AM To: linux clustering Subject: Re: usedev directive not working correctly? 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. -- Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster -- Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
