>>> Dejan Muhamedagic <[email protected]> schrieb am 08.11.2011 um 16:34 in Nachricht <20111108153419.GB3575@squib>: > On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 12:02:48PM -0800, Robinson, Eric wrote: > > > As Florian mentioned, there's the debug option, but I doubt > > > think it is going to help. What may help is to take a look at > > > the network traffic, but you'd need really good sight ;-) > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > You're right, it didn't help. What helped was going back to the Linux > > bonding documentation, learning about /proc/net/bonding, and finding out > > that the bonded links were actually in rr mode instead of active-backup > > mode as I had thought, which in turn lead to the discovery that I had a > > typo (BONDING_OPS instead of BONDING_OPTS) which was causing 50% dropped > > packets. Fixed that and the rings are very stable now. Still, it would > > have helped if the debug option gave more information. :-) > > Well, I'm not going to argue that corosync's (or of all our > projects really) logging is perfect, but in this case what can > it say apart from "token lost"?
Well, if the network is fine, and the implementation is correct, a token cannot be "lost". It might arrive too late (when there's a misconfiguration). In other cases there should be a report of some network problem. As it stands for now, a "lost token" can have a variety of reasons. Just my thoughts. Ulrich > > Thanks, > > Dejan > _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
