Thank you to everyone who helped me. I have it working now. I changed the multicast port on the servers group to 8653 from 8652 and it started working. I turned on debug level 1 on gmond and found that 8652 was for some reason already in use. I'm not sure by what, but at least now it works.
Thanks again to everyone. You folks are awesome!!! Scott -----Original Message----- From: Matt Massie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 7:13 AM To: Bernard Li Cc: Foster, Scott (MS); Marcel Birthelmer; Sean Dilda; [email protected] Subject: RE: [Ganglia-general] Multiple clusters single gmetad On Tue, 2004-11-02 at 22:51, Bernard Li wrote: > Hi Scott: > > 8651 is the default XML port, don't use it for the Multicast port! it shouldn't be a problem because XML is transported via TCP and multicast is UDP. there are no conflict between 8651/tcp and 8651/udp. -matt > > Cheers, > > Bernard > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Foster, Scott (MS) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 14:31 > > To: Marcel Birthelmer > > Cc: Bernard Li; Sean Dilda; [email protected] > > Subject: RE: [Ganglia-general] Multiple clusters single gmetad > > > > Thanks for the help. I found the lock file in > > /var/lock/subsys and deleted the gmond file. However I still > > get the problem whenever I try to start gmond after gmetad is > > started. I reversed the order and get the same error message > > except now gmetad says it is dead. > > > > Here is a quick summary of my setup: > > > > Production Nodes - Multicast 8650 > > Remote Nodes - Multicast 8651 > > Experimental Nodes - Multicast 8652 > > Servers - Multicast 8649 > > > > gmetad, apache, rrd, and gmond are setup to run on one > > server. gmetad starts ok, gmond gives me "gmond dead, subsys > > locked", rrd and apache work fine. > > > > My server is setup in its gmond.conf file to be part of the > > "Servers" cluster. Utilizing mulicast port 8649 and I have > > all trusted set to on. > > > > If I've left something out I apologize. I'm happy to post > > more info if needed. > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > Scott > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Marcel Birthelmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 2:14 PM > > To: Foster, Scott (MS) > > Cc: Bernard Li; Sean Dilda; [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [Ganglia-general] Multiple clusters single gmetad > > > > > > Probably a stale lockfile somewhere in /var/lock/subsys . Try > > '/etc/init.d/gmond zap' and then restart it. > > - Marcel > > > > Foster, Scott (MS) wrote: > > > Thank you all for your help. It is working now, but of > > course I'm trying to make one more tweak to get it exactly as > > we want it. So I'm not sure if the following can be done. > > > > > > I am trying to get the headnode and other servers to show > > up in the server group, but since the headnode is running > > gmetad when I try to launch gmond I get a error message: > > gmond dead subsys locked. > > > > > > I'm not sure what that means. Basically the server group > > doesn't show up in ganglia like all the other groups. > > > > > > Scott > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > > > Bernard Li > > > Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 11:28 AM > > > To: Foster, Scott (MS); Sean Dilda > > > Cc: [email protected] > > > Subject: RE: [Ganglia-general] Multiple clusters single gmetad > > > > > > > > > Hi: > > > > > > You would only need to list them ALL for redundancy - if > > you only list > > > one node in the data_source, then if that node dies for whatever > > > reason then gmetad will not be able to collect data from that > > > subcluster. So I guess having at least 2 nodes is good for > > a large subcluster. > > > > > > I don't think anybody in their right mind would list all > > 1000 nodes in > > > data_source ;-) > > > > > > Good luck. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Bernard > > > > > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > > >>From: Foster, Scott (MS) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 10:49 > > >>To: Bernard Li; Sean Dilda > > >>Cc: [email protected] > > >>Subject: RE: [Ganglia-general] Multiple clusters single gmetad > > >> > > >>Ah that makes sense. > > >> > > >>But if I'm running gmond on each node in the subcluster do > > I need to > > >>specify each of them as datasources? I'm not sure that makes sense > > >>especially if I have 1000 nodes each running gmond. I know I'm > > >>missing something here and I appreciate all your continued help. > > >> > > >>Scott > > >> > > >>-----Original Message----- > > >>From: Bernard Li [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 10:09 AM > > >>To: Foster, Scott (MS); Sean Dilda > > >>Cc: [email protected] > > >>Subject: RE: [Ganglia-general] Multiple clusters single gmetad > > >> > > >> > > >>Hi Scott: > > >> > > >>The different ip addresses showing in gmetad.conf is not the ip > > >>address of the server running gmetad but instead one of the > > node (the > > >>headnode of that subgroup, if you may), which runs gmond. > > >> > > >>Check the syntax of the data_source tag, the ip/hostname > > listed there > > >>refers to one or all the nodes in that subgroup/datasource. > > >> > > >>Cheers, > > >> > > >>Bernard > > >> > > >> > > >>>-----Original Message----- > > >>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > > >>>Foster, Scott (MS) > > >>>Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 9:14 > > >>>To: Sean Dilda > > >>>Cc: [email protected] > > >>>Subject: RE: [Ganglia-general] Multiple clusters single gmetad > > >>> > > >>>How does that work with the gmetad having 3 different IP > > >> > > >>addresses? > > >> > > >>>My goal was to have one server running gmetad, rrd, and > > >> > > >>apache. Do I > > >> > > >>>have to have gmetad running on another system to break my > > >> > > >>cluster into > > >> > > >>>sub-clusters? > > >>> > > >>>Thanks for the earlier reply. I appreciate it. > > >>> > > >>>Scott > > >>> > > >>>-----Original Message----- > > >>>From: Sean Dilda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>>Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 5:14 PM > > >>>To: Foster, Scott (MS) > > >>>Cc: [email protected] > > >>>Subject: Re: [Ganglia-general] Multiple clusters single gmetad > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>On Mon, 2004-11-01 at 17:47, Foster, Scott (MS) wrote: > > >>> > > >>>>I've successfully setup ganglia (thanks to everyone on this > > >>> > > >>>list), but now I want to try and break out our cluster > > into smaller > > >>>sub clusters. > > >>> > > >>>>1) Production Nodes > > >>>>2) Remote Nodes > > >>>>3) Test Nodes > > >>>> > > >>>>I'm trying to do all this with one server running gmetad > > >>> > > >>>for all the nodes in the cluster regardless of their > > >> > > >>different status. > > >> > > >>>Is this even possible? > > >>> > > >>>>I've been playing with different multicast addresses and > > >>> > > >>>xml addresses and haven't had much success. Has anyone ever tried > > >>>this before? > > >>> > > >>>Yes, this is possible, I'm currently running ganglia like this. I > > >>>have a different gmond.conf for each subcluster. > > >>>The only thing that changes between the gmond.conf's is the > > >> > > >>"name" and > > >> > > >>>"mcast_channel", all other settings are the same. > > >>>As for the gmetad.conf, here's the crucial part of it: > > >>> > > >>>data_source "Head Cluster" 300 10.10.1.19 data_source "Storage" 300 > > >>>10.10.1.1 data_source "Monitor" 300 localhost > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: > Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE > LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idU88&alloc_id065&op=click > _______________________________________________ > Ganglia-general mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ganglia-general -- PGP fingerprint 'A7C2 3C2F 8445 AD3C 135E F40B 242A 5984 ACBC 91D3' They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. --Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
