06.03.2013 15:17, Andreas Pflug wrote: > Am 06.03.13 12:20, schrieb Vladislav Bogdanov: >>>> I'm running corosync 1.4.2 (debian wheezy). >>>> Which cluster manager interface does clvmd detect? corosync or openais? >>>> You should use former, openais one is(was) using LCK service which is >>>> very unstable. >>> It's using openais. I'm not too happy about the stability, so maybe I'd >>> switch to corosync now. >> That could be the problem btw. I did neither test nor look at openais >> module implementation in clvmd, because I had plenty problems with it >> (actually with LCK under it) in the past, so I even forced to use >> corosync (CPG) + dlm instead of detected openais (CPG+LCK) for older >> systems (look at -I switch of clvmd). >> >> And, openais is deprecated upstream, so I do not see any reason to use >> it. Even gfs_controld (which is probably the only well-known user of >> openais services) actually does not strictly require it, at least I was >> able to port it to pure CPG+DLM with dlm4 on top of corosync2, which is >> not compatible with openais plugins. >> >> Also you may need quorum patch found in this list, it does its job well. >> >>> Could this be a reason for the x-lock failure as well? > You just answered the quirky question :-) > > Unfortunately, corosync/dlm don't work for me as expected. When starting > clvmd -I corosync (with dlm kernel module loaded), creating the dlm > lockspace "clvmd" fails, with > > dlm: no local IP address has been set > dlm: cannot start dlm lowcomms -107 > You need to have dlm_controld running on all nodes. And that is not trivial with corosync1. You need to either use cman or use deprecated dlm_controld.pcmk which was removed from a cluster (cman) package after 3.0.17. Latter does not work well without heavy patching (http://www.mail-archive.com/pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org/msg09959.html , http://www.mail-archive.com/pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org/msg11123.html and http://oss.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/pacemaker/2012-February/013073.html). Even after that there are some problems with it. Latest versions (4.x) of dlm (it was split from cman) work fine with corosync2 and pacemaker 1.1.6+. But I doubt it can ever be compiled with corosync1. Yes, it cannot, because it requires quorum which appeared in corosync2. You may look at thread http://oss.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/pacemaker/2012-October/015826.html for some info. That's all why I moved to corosync2. You can search through pacemaker list archives for dlm-related messages from me to get full picture. You may also look at slides I presented at LVEE winter 2013: http://lvee.org/uploads/image_upload/file/267/Linux_Clusters_at_LVEE_2013.pdf > I haven't found any hint what might go wrong on the machine (checked > already hostname resolves correctly to its ip address via /etc/hosts; > corosync uses that network too). > > Regards > Andreas _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list linux-lvm@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
