Re: [Linux-HA] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: Antw: Re: SLES11 SP3: warning: crm_find_peer: Node 'h01' and 'h01' share the same cluster nodeid: 739512321

2015-01-30 Thread Lars Marowsky-Bree 
On 2015-01-30T08:23:14, Ulrich Windl ulrich.wi...@rz.uni-regensburg.de wrote:

 Two of the three nodes were actually updated from SP1 via SP2 to SP3, and the
 third node was installed with SP3. AFAIR there was no configuration change
 since SP1.

That must be incorrect, because:

  Was the corosync.conf option clear_node_high_bit changed?
 
 # grep -i high /etc/corosync/corosync.conf
 clear_node_high_bit:new
 
 Could this cause our problem?

This is an option that didn't exist prior to SP3.

And yes, changing this option would cause exactly the issue you've seen.

The old default behaviour was buggy, but since we couldn't fix it w/o
this, we introduced new and defaulted new clusters to this; existing
configuration files would remain on their old mode and thus remain
compatible.


Regards,
Lars

-- 
Architect Storage/HA
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Jennifer Guild, Dilip 
Upmanyu, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes. -- Oscar Wilde

___
Linux-HA mailing list
Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

[Linux-HA] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: Antw: Re: SLES11 SP3: warning: crm_find_peer: Node 'h01' and 'h01' share the same cluster nodeid: 739512321

2015-01-29 Thread Ulrich Windl 
 Lars Marowsky-Bree l...@suse.com schrieb am 28.01.2015 um 17:03 in
Nachricht
20150128160342.gg1...@suse.de:
 On 2015-01-28T16:44:34, Ulrich Windl ulrich.wi...@rz.uni-regensburg.de
wrote:
 
  address actually is 172.20.16.5.
  But I see another node ID of 739512325 (hex 2C141005) which is 
 44.20.16.5. 
  That seems revered compared to the above, and the 0x2c doesn't fit 
 anywhere.
  
  It does. The highbit was stripped.
 
 So the logic is If the hight-bit is not stripped, the ID is the reversed
IP 
 address; if the hight bit is stripped, it's the non-reversed IP address 
 (without the high bit)? Doesn't it cause problems with an IPv4 class A 
 address? Now when is the high-bit stripped?
 
 Hrm. There was a bug (bnc#806634) relating to how the high bit was
 stripped, and that was fixed for SP3.
 
 Were these nodes by chance upgraded from SP2 (with not all updates
 applied) directly to SP3?

Two of the three nodes were actually updated from SP1 via SP2 to SP3, and the
third node was installed with SP3. AFAIR there was no configuration change
since SP1.

 
 Was the corosync.conf option clear_node_high_bit changed?

# grep -i high /etc/corosync/corosync.conf
clear_node_high_bit:new

Could this cause our problem?

Regards,
Ulrich

 
 
 Regards,
 Lars
 
 -- 
 Architect Storage/HA
 SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Jennifer Guild, Dilip

 Upmanyu, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
 Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes. -- Oscar Wilde
 
 ___
 Linux-HA mailing list
 Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org 
 http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha 
 See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems 



___
Linux-HA mailing list
Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems