On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 09:55:06AM +0100, Ben Clewett wrote: > > > Ben Clewett wrote: > > > > > >Hi Dejan, > > > >Got it! It's one of the options the GUI can't see, so I would never > >have got there. (I am the GUI generation :) > > > ><nvpair id="cib-bootstrap-options-default-action-timeout" > >name="default-action-timeout" value="40s"/> > > Just to correct my self, the option IS in the GUI called 'Transition > Timeout'....
Is it? But that's a very different thing AFAIK: it's the period within which a transition should finish. A transition is a set of operations carried out in order to reach certain state, it usually entails several operations. An action timeout is what is used for an operation (such as monitor/start/stop). I think that you should set the "default-action-timeout" to what fits the majority of your actions. Then, you can override it for any specific operations within the operation definition, as somebody already suggested before. That way your cluster will be better documented, easier to maintain, and have better timeouts defined. On the minus side, the configuration is going to be slightly bigger. On timeouts: leave a good safety margin, try to foresee all situations in which you don't want the cluster disturbed while keeping your failover times within the defined policy. > Sometimes it's hard to see the wood from the trees! Not this time, it doesn't seem so. > Ben > > > > >Setting this timeout to 40 seconds allows my disk to mount, and linux-ha > >is running perfectly. > > > >Many thanks "Dr House" of the linux-ha, and other very useful > >suggestions from other users. > > > >Ben > > > >------------- > > > >PS, > > > >Dare I ask, but why all the configurable timeouts in the Filesystem CRM > >if they are not used for anything? > > > > > > > > > >Dejan Muhamedagic wrote: > >>On Thu, Aug 23, 2007 at 05:25:44PM +0100, Ben Clewett wrote: > >>> > >>>Hi, > >>> > >>>Probably me misunderstanding you :) > >>> > >>>(This is probably more for the linux-ha mailing list now, but it may > >>>be of interest here...) > >>> > >>>There are various parameters in the Filesystem ocf: > >>> > >>><actions> > >>><action name="start" timeout="60" /> > >>><action name="stop" timeout="60" /> > >>><action name="notify" timeout="60" /> > >>><action name="monitor" depth="0" timeout="40" interval="20" > >>>start-delay="10" /> > >>><action name="validate-all" timeout="5" /> > >>><action name="meta-data" timeout="5" /> > >>></actions> > >>> > >>>But this is odd. The start timeout shows as 60s. Yet linux-ha > >>>killed the mount operation after 10 seconds, therefore making drbd > >>>permanently stale. Is this another bug? > >> > >>Probably not. Or, let's say that it's probably a documentation > >>bug. Actually, I'm also not sure why, but what is apparently > >>used as the timeout is the default-action-timeout from the > >>cluster_property_set. > >> > >>>This was really my reason for mailing, I wanted to see if there were > >>>any ocf experts out there... As well as to report a possible bug. > >> > >>Well, on the one hand what you encountered was definitely a > >>surprise, perhaps the default timeout should be raised. On the > >>other hand, you should normally try to run all resources, or at > >>least those about which you are not sure how they are going to > >>behave and I'd expect a 3TB filesystem to be in that category, by > >>hand before starting them by the cluster. > >> > >>>I am making better progress by upping all these values. If I find > >>>anything of significant interest, I'll report back :) > >>> > >>>Ben > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>matilda matilda wrote: > >>>>>>>Ben Clewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 23.08.2007 17:38 >>> > >>>>>The reason for this email is just to note to the group that a large > >>>>>file system under drbd mounted by the latest linux-ha will cause a > >>>>>problem which can only be sorted by a complete re-boot. > >>>>> > >>>>>I hope this will be useful, and somebody may decide it's a bug > >>>>>worth investigation... > >>>>Hi Ben, > >>>> > >>>>I'm sure you misunderstood me, but probably I misunderstand you. :-) > >>>>As I said in my first answer: You HAVE to increase the timeout value > >>>>for the start operation of your Resource Agent. As you said in your > >>>>initial mail, your RA times out before the big filesystem CAN be > >>>>mounted because of its size. You CAN set a timeout for every action > >>>>of every resource overwriting the default action timeout. > >>>> > >>>>So, really, enhance the timeout value to a real comfortable value. > >>>>It's better to make it too big than too small. > >>>>If you already made this forget this mail. :-) > >>>> > >>>>Best regards > >>>>Andreas > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>_______________________________________________ > >>>>Linux-HA mailing list > >>>>[email protected] > >>>>http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > >>>>See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems > >>>> > >>> > >>>************************************************************************* > >>> > >>>This e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is > >>>intended > >>>solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. Any > >>>content in this message is not necessarily a view or statement from Road > >>>Tech Computer Systems Limited but is that of the individual sender. If > >>>you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received > >>>this e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, > >>>printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. We use > >>>reasonable endeavours to virus scan all e-mails leaving the company but > >>>no warranty is given that this e-mail and any attachments are virus > >>>free. > >>>You should undertake your own virus checking. The right to monitor > >>>e-mail > >>>communications through our networks is reserved by us > >>> > >>> Road Tech Computer Systems Ltd. Shenley Hall, Rectory Lane, Shenley, > >>> Radlett, Hertfordshire, WD7 9AN. - VAT Registration No GB 449 3582 17 > >>> Registered in England No: 02017435, Registered Address: Charter > >>>Court, Midland Road, Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, HP2 5GE. > >>>************************************************************************* > >>> > >>>_______________________________________________ > >>>Linux-HA mailing list > >>>[email protected] > >>>http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > >>>See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Linux-HA mailing list > >>[email protected] > >>http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > >>See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems > >> > > > > > >************************************************************************* > >This e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended > >solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. Any > >content in this message is not necessarily a view or statement from Road > >Tech Computer Systems Limited but is that of the individual sender. If > >you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received > >this e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, > >printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. We use > >reasonable endeavours to virus scan all e-mails leaving the company but > >no warranty is given that this e-mail and any attachments are virus free. > >You should undertake your own virus checking. The right to monitor e-mail > >communications through our networks is reserved by us > > > > Road Tech Computer Systems Ltd. Shenley Hall, Rectory Lane, Shenley, > > Radlett, Hertfordshire, WD7 9AN. - VAT Registration No GB 449 3582 17 > > Registered in England No: 02017435, Registered Address: Charter Court, > > Midland Road, Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, HP2 5GE. > >************************************************************************* > >_______________________________________________ > >Linux-HA mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > >See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems > > > > > ************************************************************************* > This e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended > solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. Any > content in this message is not necessarily a view or statement from Road > Tech Computer Systems Limited but is that of the individual sender. If > you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received > this e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, > printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. We use > reasonable endeavours to virus scan all e-mails leaving the company but > no warranty is given that this e-mail and any attachments are virus free. > You should undertake your own virus checking. The right to monitor e-mail > communications through our networks is reserved by us > > Road Tech Computer Systems Ltd. Shenley Hall, Rectory Lane, Shenley, > Radlett, Hertfordshire, WD7 9AN. - VAT Registration No GB 449 3582 17 > Registered in England No: 02017435, Registered Address: Charter Court, > Midland Road, Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, HP2 5GE. > ************************************************************************* > _______________________________________________ > Linux-HA mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
