On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 3:15 PM, HIDEO YAMAUCHI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Dejan, > > > > Right. And that got only those very short backtraces. I suppose > > that you didn't get any error messages from gdb? > > Yes. > The content moved by the hand is as shown in the mail sent to Mr. Andrew.
Just "andrew" is fine. No need for Mr :-) > > > > Anyway, afterwards you ran gdb by hand, right? How did you > > exactly invoke gdb? I wonder what could have made the difference. > > It was made to run as follows. > > #gdb /usr/lib64/heartbeat/crmd corefilename > > Is something mistake found? I'd guess its an environment setting (dejan: LD_LIBRARY_PATH perhaps?) thats not set (since hb_report is starting gdb in a non-interactive shell) > > I'm sorry. > I might not correctly understand your opinion because I am not good at > English. > > Regards, > Hideo Yamauch. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > > Dejan Muhamedagic > > Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:13 PM > > To: High-Availability Linux Development List > > Subject: Re: [Linux-ha-dev] Re: [RFC] heartbeat-2.1.4 > > > > > > Hi Yamauchi-san, > > > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 08:34:42PM +0900, HIDEO YAMAUCHI wrote: > > > Hi Dejan, > > > > > > > It's strange that hb_report fails to produce good backtraces. How > > > > did you get them from the command line? > > > > > > I used a "hb_report -f 09:00 -u root /root/mast_slave_emg2" > > command-line. > > > > Right. And that got only those very short backtraces. I suppose > > that you didn't get any error messages from gdb? > > > > Anyway, afterwards you ran gdb by hand, right? How did you > > exactly invoke gdb? I wonder what could have made the difference. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Dejan > > > > > Regards, > > > Hideo Yamauchi. > > > > > > --- Dejan Muhamedagic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Yamauchi-san, > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 10:13:28AM +0900, HIDEO YAMAUCHI wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > I tried it again. > > > > > The similar situation was generated, but SIGSEGV rose in > > both nodes this time. > > > > > > > > > > A position of a DC node was different from the last time. > > > > > > > > > > As a result of hb_report, I attach a result of gdb. > > > > > > > > It's strange that hb_report fails to produce good backtraces. How > > > > did you get them from the command line? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Dejan > > > > > > > > > Please teach it if there is some insufficient information. > > > > > I will send it later. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > Hideo Yamauchi. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________________ > > > > > Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] > > > > > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev > > > > > Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/ > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________________ > > > > Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] > > > > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev > > > > Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/ > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________________ > > > Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] > > > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev > > > Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/ > > _______________________________________________________ > > Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] > > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev > > Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/ > > _______________________________________________________ > Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev > Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/ > _______________________________________________________ Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
