Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-25 Thread Tris Hoar

On 24/03/2015 18:54, Les Mikesell wrote:

On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Frank Cox thea...@melvilletheatre.com wrote:

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 12:56:27 -0500
Les Mikesell wrote:


Doesn't anyone have a list of the oldest
kernel version for each Centos version  you could be running and still
avoid known problems?


The best answer to your question is the latest version, since previous 
versions all have known issues of one kind or another.

It's not a great idea to run outdated Centos systems with known bugs of any 
kind.


I can't argue with that (then again, you were running that buggy code
before and happy with it), but having to reboot frequently is not
ideal either, particularly on machines where scheduling downtime is a
fairly involved process.   I'm looking for the compromise with the
least pain involved.


Hi Les,

https://access.redhat.com/labs/leapsecond/leap_vulnerability.sh
If you don't have a subscription then the key bits from the script are:
# RHEL 4 needs to be after -89
# RHEL 5 needs to be after -164
# RHEL 6 Affected Versions
# 6 GA: All Versions
# 6.1: Versions before -131.30.2
# 6.2: Versions before -220.25.1
# 6.3: Versions before -279.5.2

and that the tzdata should be from 2015

Tris


*
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity 
to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email 
in error please notify postmas...@bgfl.org


The views expressed within this email are those of the 
individual, and not necessarily those of the organisation

*
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-25 Thread Les Mikesell
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 7:41 AM, Tris Hoar trish...@bgfl.org wrote:
 On 24/03/2015 18:54, Les Mikesell wrote:

 On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Frank Cox thea...@melvilletheatre.com
 wrote:

 On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 12:56:27 -0500
 Les Mikesell wrote:

 Doesn't anyone have a list of the oldest
 kernel version for each Centos version  you could be running and still
 avoid known problems?

 https://access.redhat.com/labs/leapsecond/leap_vulnerability.sh
 If you don't have a subscription then the key bits from the script are:
 # RHEL 4 needs to be after -89
 # RHEL 5 needs to be after -164
 # RHEL 6 Affected Versions
 # 6 GA: All Versions
 # 6.1: Versions before -131.30.2
 # 6.2: Versions before -220.25.1
 # 6.3: Versions before -279.5.2

 and that the tzdata should be from 2015


Thank you.  That may save dealing with at least a few change request
forms and scheduling procedures.

-- 
Les Mikesell
  lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-24 Thread Frank Cox
On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 12:56:27 -0500
Les Mikesell wrote:

 Doesn't anyone have a list of the oldest
 kernel version for each Centos version  you could be running and still
 avoid known problems?

The best answer to your question is the latest version, since previous 
versions all have known issues of one kind or another.

It's not a great idea to run outdated Centos systems with known bugs of any 
kind.

-- 
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-24 Thread Les Mikesell
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Frank Cox thea...@melvilletheatre.com wrote:
 On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 12:56:27 -0500
 Les Mikesell wrote:

 Doesn't anyone have a list of the oldest
 kernel version for each Centos version  you could be running and still
 avoid known problems?

 The best answer to your question is the latest version, since previous 
 versions all have known issues of one kind or another.

 It's not a great idea to run outdated Centos systems with known bugs of any 
 kind.

I can't argue with that (then again, you were running that buggy code
before and happy with it), but having to reboot frequently is not
ideal either, particularly on machines where scheduling downtime is a
fairly involved process.   I'm looking for the compromise with the
least pain involved.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
  lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-24 Thread Les Mikesell
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Akemi Yagi amy...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Gordon Messmer gordon.mess...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 On 03/06/2015 01:41 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:

 I just want the package revisions for at least the kernel and tzdata*
 files and anything else where previously-found bugs related to the
 leap second have been fixed.


 https://access.redhat.com/articles/15145

 In addition to that article, the following one was updated recently:

 https://access.redhat.com/articles/199563
 (Are we susceptible to a leap second event?)


Still way tl;dnr material.  Doesn't anyone have a list of the oldest
kernel version for each Centos version  you could be running and still
avoid known problems?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-19 Thread Mark Felder


On Wed, Mar 18, 2015, at 18:30, Akemi Yagi wrote:
 On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Gordon Messmer gordon.mess...@gmail.com
 wrote:
  On 03/06/2015 01:41 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
 
  I just want the package revisions for at least the kernel and tzdata*
  files and anything else where previously-found bugs related to the
  leap second have been fixed.
 
 
  https://access.redhat.com/articles/15145
 
 In addition to that article, the following one was updated recently:
 
 https://access.redhat.com/articles/199563
 (Are we susceptible to a leap second event?)
 
 Akemi


This article is pretty thorough on things to consider in regards to
computers and leap seconds:

http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=1967009
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-19 Thread Bernard Lheureux

On 03/19/2015 07:47 PM, Mark Felder wrote:

I just used the test script privided by RHEL 
https://access.redhat.com/labs/leapsecond/leap_vulnerability.sh to test 
my up2date CentOS 5 and CentOS 6 and all are reported as Non Vulnerable !


On Wed, Mar 18, 2015, at 18:30, Akemi Yagi wrote:

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Gordon Messmer gordon.mess...@gmail.com
wrote:

On 03/06/2015 01:41 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:

I just want the package revisions for at least the kernel and tzdata*
files and anything else where previously-found bugs related to the
leap second have been fixed.


https://access.redhat.com/articles/15145

In addition to that article, the following one was updated recently:

https://access.redhat.com/articles/199563
(Are we susceptible to a leap second event?)

Akemi


This article is pretty thorough on things to consider in regards to
computers and leap seconds:

http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=1967009
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos



--
(°-   Bernard Lheureux Gestionnaire des MailingLists ML, TechML, LinuxML
//\   http://www.bbsoft4.org/Mailinglists.htm ** MailTo:r...@bbsoft4.org
v_/_  http://www.bbsoft4.org/  *  http://www.portalinux.org/

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-18 Thread Akemi Yagi
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Gordon Messmer gordon.mess...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 03/06/2015 01:41 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:

 I just want the package revisions for at least the kernel and tzdata*
 files and anything else where previously-found bugs related to the
 leap second have been fixed.


 https://access.redhat.com/articles/15145

In addition to that article, the following one was updated recently:

https://access.redhat.com/articles/199563
(Are we susceptible to a leap second event?)

Akemi
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-06 Thread Les Mikesell
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 4:04 PM, Gordon Messmer gordon.mess...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 03/06/2015 01:41 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:

 I just want the package revisions for at least the kernel and tzdata*
 files and anything else where previously-found bugs related to the
 leap second have been fixed.


 https://access.redhat.com/articles/15145
 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-0496.html

Helpful, but not exactly concise...  And I don't understand the
concept of /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/*. Are those supposed to print
the right time if your clock is left wrong?

 Contrary to your previous assertion, in 2012, it was not the kernel that
 consumed CPU cycles.  That problem was seen in user space.

But it is just as much the kernel's fault if it returns from
nanosleep()/usleep() instantly without counting any time down so you
spin in user space as if stayed in the kernel.  Nothing in user space
could have fixed it.

 The problem was
 fixed by changing the kernel's implementation of leap second handling, but
 the reason that you are being told that testing your applications is the
 only way to verify that there is not a problem is that these problems aren't
 confined to the kernel and tzdata packages.

Unknown problems can happen anywhere/any time.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-06 Thread Chris Adams
Once upon a time, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com said:
 Helpful, but not exactly concise...  And I don't understand the
 concept of /usr/share/zoneinfo/right/*. Are those supposed to print
 the right time if your clock is left wrong?

Basically, POSIX time doesn't really handle leap seconds.  In theory,
the timeinfo struct can count to 60 (even 61) seconds in a minute.

However, the base time_t is specified as days of exactly 86,400 seconds.
The Linux kernel (and IIRC most other Unix systems) just tick the same
second twice; this June, the time() function will return 1435708799 for
two seconds on the wall clock, and gettimeofday() will count tv_usec
from 0 to 999, then back to 0, without changing tv_sec.

So, there's a hack for things that really want to know leap seconds.  It
is done in the timezone data files; they know the offset from POSIX to
UTC (based on all the leap seconds inserted since the start of the POSIX
epoch, 1970-01-01) and report time that way.

If your kernel never handled leap seconds, and was set to UTC seconds
since 1970-01-01 instead of POSIX seconds, then you could use the
right timezone files to see the current time.  However, you'd be out
of step with all the rest of the Internet for anything that uses POSIX
seconds (fileservers for example), and always think the clock was slow
(plus you'd have to run a custom copy of NTP to not try to fix the
clock).

-- 
Chris Adams li...@cmadams.net
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-06 Thread Les Mikesell
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 3:27 PM, Michael Hennebry
henne...@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu wrote:
 Unix and ntp handle leap seconds a bit differently.
 Unix time increases during the leap second and drops back a second after.
 Ntp freezes time during the leap second.
 OS kernels may do either or neither.

Does anyone have a succinct summary of how to prove to
management-types that a given linux box won't have a problem with the
leap second?   Like kernel  some_version, tzdata  some_version,
tzdata-java  some_version?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
  lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-06 Thread Chris Adams
Once upon a time, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com said:
 Does anyone have a succinct summary of how to prove to
 management-types that a given linux box won't have a problem with the
 leap second?   Like kernel  some_version, tzdata  some_version,
 tzdata-java  some_version?

Only way to prove it is to set up a test and try it.  AFAIK there are
no known issues with an up-to-date system, but that was also true at the
last couple of leap seconds (the issues that happened were previously
unknown).

There are a couple of ways to test:

- If you don't need to prove NTP goodness, you can set up a
  free-running system with no NTP client, set the time to just before
  the leap second, and then use the adjtimex command (looks like this
  isn't in RHEL/CentOS/EPEL so you would need to build it, like from the
  Fedora package) to set the leap flag.  Then just watch your system
  through the leap second.

- If you also need to prove NTP, you'll have to set up a second system
  to be your NTP server.  Set it to local mode with no outside servers,
  add the current leapseconds file, and set it's clock to a little
  before the leap second.  Sync your test server to that clock, then
  wait for the leap second.

The issue (from IIRC 2009?) I ran into with a leap second only happened
when the kernel was under load (race condition on console lock when
printing the leap second added message).  The most recent leap second
issue had to do with timers not triggering in the expected way (can't
remember if that was kernel, or just applications/libraries not handling
a kernel change).

-- 
Chris Adams li...@cmadams.net
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-06 Thread Les Mikesell
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Chris Adams li...@cmadams.net wrote:
 Once upon a time, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com said:
 Does anyone have a succinct summary of how to prove to
 management-types that a given linux box won't have a problem with the
 leap second?   Like kernel  some_version, tzdata  some_version,
 tzdata-java  some_version?

 Only way to prove it is to set up a test and try it.

I don't think I need to 'prove' that computer programs do repeatable
things.  I just want to know the version numbers that need to be
installed - something relatively easy to check.

 AFAIK there are
 no known issues with an up-to-date system,

Yeah, but you probably would have said that before the 2012 instance
too...  And what I really want to know is how 'out-of-date' a system
can be.

 but that was also true at the
 last couple of leap seconds (the issues that happened were previously
 unknown).

Now we know the issues, and hopefully someone had done the simulation
tests.  I just want to know the specific kernel and package versions
that have the fixes.  But none of the links I've found discussing the
issues boil it down to something a non-geek would want to see.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-06 Thread m . roth
Les Mikesell wrote:
 On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Chris Adams li...@cmadams.net wrote:
 Once upon a time, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com said:
 Does anyone have a succinct summary of how to prove to
 management-types that a given linux box won't have a problem with the
 leap second?   Like kernel  some_version, tzdata  some_version,
 tzdata-java  some_version?

 Only way to prove it is to set up a test and try it.

 I don't think I need to 'prove' that computer programs do repeatable
 things.  I just want to know the version numbers that need to be
 installed - something relatively easy to check.
snip
Two other thoughts: first, that it worked perfectly fine the last leap
second, and second, that ntpd, according to the manpage, can and will
adjust for seconds of difference with no problem at all, since that's it's
job.

mark

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-06 Thread Les Mikesell
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:50 PM,  m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:

 I don't think I need to 'prove' that computer programs do repeatable
 things.  I just want to know the version numbers that need to be
 installed - something relatively easy to check.
 snip
 Two other thoughts: first, that it worked perfectly fine the last leap
 second, and second, that ntpd, according to the manpage, can and will
 adjust for seconds of difference with no problem at all, since that's it's
 job.

Errr, no. It did _not_ work fine in the last leap second.  If you run
threaded applications (including, but not exclusively, java) or
applications that called usleep the kernel would spin with 100% CPU
use until you reset the date with some means other than ntp.   How
could you have missed that:
http://www.wired.com/2012/07/leap-second-bug-wreaks-havoc-with-java-linux/.

Every other sysadmin in the world got calls in the middle of the night
to fix their servers.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-06 Thread Chris Adams
Once upon a time, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com said:
 Now we know the issues, and hopefully someone had done the simulation
 tests.

No, we know the issue that broke last time (2012), and a different issue
that broke the time before that (2008) (they were different problems).
We don't know any issues that may happen this time, unless you think no
bugs have been introduced since the last leap second (obviously
hindsight tells us there were between 2008 and 2012).

Before the 2012 leap second, I ran tests to make sure the 2008 issue had
been fixed, and it had.  However, apparently nobody else ran their
current setups through tests (maybe also hoping somebody else had done
it), so there was a new issue.  I haven't actually checked to see that
the 2008 issue has remained fixed (it should have, since the code had
been changed to move away from that lock all together).  My setup wasn't
hit by the 2012 issue, so I don't have a simple test for that.

So again, if you want to make sure there's no new issue, you'll have to
set up a test yourself.  I doubt the 2008 or 2012 issues will happen
again, but there's plenty of room for new issues.

-- 
Chris Adams li...@cmadams.net
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-06 Thread Chris Adams
Once upon a time, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com said:
 On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Chris Adams li...@cmadams.net wrote:
  So again, if you want to make sure there's no new issue, you'll have to
  set up a test yourself.  I doubt the 2008 or 2012 issues will happen
  again, but there's plenty of room for new issues.
 
 So are you saying that you think no one upstream has done any testing
 yet?  Or that I should have better resources for testing than they do?
I was hoping things weren't really that bad and that I just hadn't
 found the simple summary of results yet.

Like I said, probably someone that had an issue in 2012 has tested for
the 2012 issue, so that probably won't re-occur.  But that doesn't mean
that someone has tested every piece of software in every combination in
use.

Again, using the 2012 leap second as an example, I (and I expect others)
had experienced an issue in 2008, so I ran tests for that issue.  I
didn't even think about thread scheduling being a problem (and my
servers weren't hit by that anyway), so I didn't test for that, nor did
I do a full up test like I described initially.

So, it is possible that everything will be fine (there's been more
attention to leap second cases after the 2012 issue had wider impact
than the 2008 issue).  It is also possible that some _new_ type of issue
has been introduced in the last 2.5 years that won't appear until this
leap second, but if nobody tests for it, we won't know until the clock
ticks 2015-06-30 23:59:60.

Short answer: last time it was threaded stuff like Java, the time before
it was systems under heavy kernel loads.  Who knows, this time Postfix
could hang, or MySQL could corrupt databases, or something else.
Probably nothing will happen, but if you want a cover your ass report,
I don't think anybody has done that.

-- 
Chris Adams li...@cmadams.net
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-06 Thread Les Mikesell
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 2:26 PM,  m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:
 
 Every other sysadmin in the world got calls in the middle of the night
 to fix their servers.

 Ah, the system was fine, it was java that failed. And we've got a few
 tomcat apps... but IIRC, we fixed them the next day - we're tier 3, and
 so not critical, and could do that.

No, it was _not_ java that failed.  The kernel was spinning instead of
scheduling threads.  Any threaded application would have triggered the
kernel bug - or a usleep() call from a non-threaded application.   By
the time I got the call I was able to google the fix about resetting
the date, but the guys who manage some SuSE systems started earlier
and ended up rebooting some of them - and they don't run java
applications.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-06 Thread Les Mikesell
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Chris Adams li...@cmadams.net wrote:
 
 So again, if you want to make sure there's no new issue, you'll have to
 set up a test yourself.  I doubt the 2008 or 2012 issues will happen
 again, but there's plenty of room for new issues.

So are you saying that you think no one upstream has done any testing
yet?  Or that I should have better resources for testing than they do?
   I was hoping things weren't really that bad and that I just hadn't
found the simple summary of results yet.

-- 
  Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-06 Thread Les Mikesell
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Chris Adams li...@cmadams.net wrote:

 Short answer: last time it was threaded stuff like Java, the time before
 it was systems under heavy kernel loads.  Who knows, this time Postfix
 could hang, or MySQL could corrupt databases, or something else.
 Probably nothing will happen, but if you want a cover your ass report,
 I don't think anybody has done that.

I'm not looking for a research project on how to prove that the last
bug has been found or not.  And I'm not particularly concerned about
application-level bugs. Every time a second rolls over we take a
chance of hitting a new previously unknown bug.  We're all taking that
chance.

I just want the package revisions for at least the kernel and tzdata*
files and anything else where previously-found bugs related to the
leap second have been fixed.What I want to know (and be able to
describe concisely to a non-geek person) is that on a particular
machine either that the known/expected bugs have been fixed, or that
they haven't and we need to schedule a reboot.   And it seems like
something everyone else using a distribution would want to know as
well, at least for machines where scheduling a reboot is no-trivial.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-06 Thread m . roth
Les Mikesell wrote:
 On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:50 PM,  m.r...@5-cent.us wrote:

 I don't think I need to 'prove' that computer programs do repeatable
 things.  I just want to know the version numbers that need to be
 installed - something relatively easy to check.
 snip
 Two other thoughts: first, that it worked perfectly fine the last leap
 second, and second, that ntpd, according to the manpage, can and will
 adjust for seconds of difference with no problem at all, since that's
 it's job.

 Errr, no. It did _not_ work fine in the last leap second.  If you run
 threaded applications (including, but not exclusively, java) or
 applications that called usleep the kernel would spin with 100% CPU
 use until you reset the date with some means other than ntp.   How
 could you have missed that:
 http://www.wired.com/2012/07/leap-second-bug-wreaks-havoc-with-java-linux/.

 Every other sysadmin in the world got calls in the middle of the night
 to fix their servers.

Ah, the system was fine, it was java that failed. And we've got a few
tomcat apps... but IIRC, we fixed them the next day - we're tier 3, and
so not critical, and could do that.

 mark

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-03-06 Thread Gordon Messmer

On 03/06/2015 01:41 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:

I just want the package revisions for at least the kernel and tzdata*
files and anything else where previously-found bugs related to the
leap second have been fixed.


https://access.redhat.com/articles/15145
https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2013-0496.html

Contrary to your previous assertion, in 2012, it was not the kernel that 
consumed CPU cycles.  That problem was seen in user space.  The problem 
was fixed by changing the kernel's implementation of leap second 
handling, but the reason that you are being told that testing your 
applications is the only way to verify that there is not a problem is 
that these problems aren't confined to the kernel and tzdata packages.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-01-20 Thread Michael Hennebry

Unix and ntp handle leap seconds a bit differently.
Unix time increases during the leap second and drops back a second after.
Ntp freezes time during the leap second.
OS kernels may do either or neither.

--
Michael   henne...@web.cs.ndsu.nodak.edu
SCSI is NOT magic. There are *fundamental technical
reasons* why it is necessary to sacrifice a young
goat to your SCSI chain now and then.   --   John Woods
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-01-15 Thread Jason Pyeron
 -Original Message-
 From: Les Mikesell
 Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:36
 
 On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Jason Pyeron 
 jpye...@pdinc.us wrote:
 
   -Original Message-
   From: Akemi Yagi
   Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:05
   
snip/
   Apparently Red Hat is well aware of the upcoming leap second:
   
   https://access.redhat.com/solutions/1317263
   
   Unfortunately all the related bugzilla reports are private so we
   cannot see the status.
snip/
 Can you consolidate this to:
  'if you have updated your kernel and rebooted later than Sept. 2012
 you should have the fix'?

Yes; I thought that was assumed (or obvious), when this whole topic came up 
again. 

But I was responding to the cannot see comment, so I read it all and posted a 
1st grade book report on it. :)

-Jason

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-   -
- Jason Pyeron  PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us -
- Principal Consultant  10 West 24th Street #100-
- +1 (443) 269-1555 x333Baltimore, Maryland 21218   -
-   -
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00. 

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-01-15 Thread Jason Pyeron
 -Original Message-
 From: Akemi Yagi
 Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:05
 
 On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 8:43 AM, G Galitz ge...@galitz.org wrote:
 
  Hi.
 
  We have another leap second coming.  Have past bugs with 
 Centos and leap
  seconds (specifically high CPU spikes) been resolved? 
 Should we be worried?
 
 Apparently Red Hat is well aware of the upcoming leap second:
 
 https://access.redhat.com/solutions/1317263
 
 Unfortunately all the related bugzilla reports are private so we
 cannot see the status.

It seems to boil down to: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479765 
which is closed fixed. The private bugs are pay attention tickets, but some 
do reference KB Article Leap Seconds in Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

A summary of Leap Seconds in Red Hat Enterprise Linux - 
https://access.redhat.com/articles/15145 

Issue:

6 different ways of saying Will my system work? .

Environment:

EL 4-7

Resolution:

For EL6 see:
* https://access.redhat.com/knowledge/solutions/154713
* https://access.redhat.com/knowledge/solutions/154793
* https://access.redhat.com/knowledge/solutions/173693
* https://access.redhat.com/knowledge/articles/199563

Otherwise if you run NTP resolution A else B

Resolution A:

NTP logging may crash EL 4/5, update your system.

EL4 see http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2009-1024.html
EL5 see http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2009-1243.html
EL6/7 not affected, but EL6 see https://access.redhat.com/site/solutions/154793 
CPU usage sucks after leap second*

[*:side bar: see http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2012-1199.html for the patch 
or do something like date $(date +someformatthatworks)]

PPC and IA64 arches will self destruct and should not use NTP

Resolution B:

Your time will be wrong and you should be happy. A new tzdata will come out see 
bugs: 
EL4: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1181975
EL5: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1181933
EL6: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180536
EL7: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1181970

Root Cause:

https://what-if.xkcd.com/26/

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-   -
- Jason Pyeron  PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us -
- Principal Consultant  10 West 24th Street #100-
- +1 (443) 269-1555 x333Baltimore, Maryland 21218   -
-   -
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00. 

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-01-15 Thread Akemi Yagi
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 8:43 AM, G Galitz ge...@galitz.org wrote:

 Hi.

 We have another leap second coming.  Have past bugs with Centos and leap
 seconds (specifically high CPU spikes) been resolved? Should we be worried?

Apparently Red Hat is well aware of the upcoming leap second:

https://access.redhat.com/solutions/1317263

Unfortunately all the related bugzilla reports are private so we
cannot see the status.

Akemi
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-01-15 Thread Akemi Yagi
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Akemi Yagi amy...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 8:43 AM, G Galitz ge...@galitz.org wrote:

 We have another leap second coming.  Have past bugs with Centos and leap
 seconds (specifically high CPU spikes) been resolved? Should we be worried?

 Apparently Red Hat is well aware of the upcoming leap second:

 https://access.redhat.com/solutions/1317263

 Unfortunately all the related bugzilla reports are private so we
 cannot see the status.

The bugzilla reports are no longer private (thanks to whoever made them public).

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1181933  (EL5)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180536  (EL6)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1181970  (EL7)

Akemi
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-01-15 Thread Les Mikesell
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Jason Pyeron jpye...@pdinc.us wrote:

 6 different ways of saying Will my system work? .

[...lots of stuff...]

 [*:side bar: see http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2012-1199.html for the 
 patch or do something like date $(date +someformatthatworks)]


Can you consolidate this to:
 'if you have updated your kernel and rebooted later than Sept. 2012
you should have the fix'?

-- 
Les Mikesell
   lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-01-15 Thread Rob Kampen

On 01/16/2015 07:05 AM, Akemi Yagi wrote:

On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Akemi Yagi amy...@gmail.com wrote:

On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 8:43 AM, G Galitz ge...@galitz.org wrote:

We have another leap second coming.  Have past bugs with Centos and leap
seconds (specifically high CPU spikes) been resolved? Should we be worried?

Apparently Red Hat is well aware of the upcoming leap second:

https://access.redhat.com/solutions/1317263

Unfortunately all the related bugzilla reports are private so we
cannot see the status.

The bugzilla reports are no longer private (thanks to whoever made them public).

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1181933  (EL5)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1180536  (EL6)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1181970  (EL7)
Fascinating - describes what's happening but no mention of how we can 
rest assured that all will be well
As I ponder it, I recognise that most of our systems are constantly 
calculating date/time values based upon the epoch - the number of 
seconds since a particular date/time, all these calculations need to be 
cognisant of these leap seconds, so its not just the ntp daemon, 
although that will be most immediately impacted, the effects of this 
need to be enshrined in code algorithms forever (well a very long time).

Akemi
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] leap second and Centos

2015-01-15 Thread Les Mikesell
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Rob Kampen
rkam...@reaching-clients.com wrote:

 Fascinating - describes what's happening but no mention of how we can rest
 assured that all will be well
 As I ponder it, I recognise that most of our systems are constantly
 calculating date/time values based upon the epoch - the number of seconds
 since a particular date/time, all these calculations need to be cognisant of
 these leap seconds, so its not just the ntp daemon, although that will be
 most immediately impacted, the effects of this need to be enshrined in code
 algorithms forever (well a very long time).

The overall time calculations weren't really the issue last time
around.  The problem was with sub-second sleeps and the thread
scheduler being confused and spinning when ntp inserted an extra
second in the clock. Any other way of resetting the clock fixed it.
(e.g. date -s `date`).   It was a kernel bug and is theoretically
fixed now.

But I agree that those open bugs on the tzdata package aren't all that
helpful except to show that someone is thinking about it.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos