Re: [Problem] Corosync cannot reconstitute a cluster.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Fabio,

Thank you for comment.

> I'll let Honza look at it, I don't have enough physical hardware to
> reproduce.

All right.

Many Thanks!
Hideo Yamauchi.


--- On Tue, 2013/6/11, Fabio M. Di Nitto <fdinitto@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi Yamauchi-san,
> 
> I'll let Honza look at it, I don't have enough physical hardware to
> reproduce.
> 
> Fabio
> 
> On 06/11/2013 01:15 AM, renayama19661014@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > Hi Fabio,
> > 
> > Thank you for comments.
> > 
> > We confirmed this problem in the physical environment.
> > The communication of corosync lets eth1,eth2 go through.
> > 
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > [root@bl460g6a ~]# ip addr show
> > (snip)
> > 3: eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP qlen 1000
> >     link/ether f4:ce:46:b3:fe:3c brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> >     inet 192.168.101.9/24 brd 192.168.101.255 scope global eth1
> >     inet6 fe80::f6ce:46ff:feb3:fe3c/64 scope link 
> >        valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> > 4: eth2: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP qlen 1000
> >     link/ether 18:a9:05:78:6c:f0 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> >     inet 192.168.102.9/24 brd 192.168.102.255 scope global eth2
> >     inet6 fe80::1aa9:5ff:fe78:6cf0/64 scope link 
> >        valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
> > (snip)
> > 8: virbr0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN 
> >     link/ether 52:54:00:7f:f3:0a brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> >     inet 192.168.122.1/24 brd 192.168.122.255 scope global virbr0
> > 9: virbr0-nic: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noop state DOWN qlen 500
> >     link/ether 52:54:00:7f:f3:0a brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> > -----------------------------------------------
> > 
> > I think that it is not a virtual environmental problem.
> > 
> > I attach the log that I confirmed just to make sure in three Blade.(RHEL6.4)
> > * I performed the interception of the communication with a network switch.
> > 
> > The phenomenon is similar, and, as for one node, a loop does an OPERATIONAL state, and two other nodes do not change in an OPERATIONAL state.
> > 
> > After all is the problem same as the bug that you taught?
> >> Check this thread as reference:
> >> http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/openais/2013-April/016792.html
> > 
> > 
> > Best Regards,
> > Hideo Yamauchi.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- On Fri, 2013/5/31, Fabio M. Di Nitto <fdinitto@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> >> On 5/31/2013 7:12 AM, renayama19661014@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >>> Hi All,
> >>>
> >>> We discovered the problem of the network of the corosync communication.
> >>>
> >>> We composed a cluster of three nodes on KVM in corosync.
> >>>
> >>> Step 1) Start corosync service in all nodes. 
> >>>
> >>> Step 2) Confirm that a cluster is comprised of all nodes definitely and became the OPERATIONAL state.
> >>>
> >>> Step 3) Cut off the network of node1(rh64-coro1) and node2(rh64-coro2) from a host of KVM.
> >>>
> >>>         [root@kvm-host ~]# brctl delif virbr3 vnet5;brctl delif virbr2 vnet1
> >>>
> >>> Step 4) Because a problem occurred, we stop all nodes.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The problem occurs at the time of step 3.
> >>>
> >>> One node(rh64-coro1) continues moving a state after becoming the OPERATIONAL state.
> >>>
> >>> Two nodes(rh64-coro2 and rh64-coro3) continue changing in a state.
> >>> It seems to never change in an OPERATIONAL state while the first node operates.
> >>>
> >>> This means that two nodes(rh64-coro2 and rh64-coro3) cannot complete cluster constitution.
> >>> When this network trouble happens, by the setting that corosync combined with Pacemaker, corosync cannot notify Pacemaker of the constitution change of the cluster.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Question 1) Are there any parameters to solve this problem in corosync.conf?
> >>>   * We bundle up an interface(Bonding) and think that it can be settled by appointing "rrp_mode:none", but do not want to appoint "rrp_mode:none".
> >>>
> >>> Question 2) Is this a bug? Or is it specifications of the communication of corosync?
> >>
> >> We already checked this specific test, and it appears to be a bug in
> >> the kernel bridge code when handling multicast traffic (groups are not
> >> joined correctly and traffic is not forwarded).
> >>
> >> Check this thread as reference:
> >> http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/openais/2013-April/016792.html
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Fabio
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> discuss mailing list
> >> discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >>
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Clusters]     [Corosync Project]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Photo]     [Yosemite News]    [Yosemite Photos]    [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [X.Org]

  Powered by Linux