On 10/07/2013, at 2:15 PM, Vladislav Bogdanov <[email protected]> wrote:
> 10.07.2013 07:05, Andrew Beekhof wrote: >> >> On 10/07/2013, at 2:04 PM, Vladislav Bogdanov <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> 10.07.2013 03:39, Andrew Beekhof wrote: >>>> >>>> On 10/07/2013, at 1:51 AM, Vladislav Bogdanov <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> 03.07.2013 19:31, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 07:53:52AM +0300, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote: >>>>>>> 01.07.2013 18:29, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 05:29:31PM +0300, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote: >>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm trying to look if it is now safe to delete non-running nodes >>>>>>>>> (corosync 2.3, pacemaker HEAD, crmsh tip). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> # crm node delete v02-d >>>>>>>>> WARNING: 2: crm_node bad format: 7 v02-c >>>>>>>>> WARNING: 2: crm_node bad format: 8 v02-d >>>>>>>>> WARNING: 2: crm_node bad format: 5 v02-a >>>>>>>>> WARNING: 2: crm_node bad format: 6 v02-b >>>>>>>>> INFO: 2: node v02-d not found by crm_node >>>>>>>>> INFO: 2: node v02-d deleted >>>>>>>>> # >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So, I expect that crmsh still doesn't follow latest changes to >>>>>>>>> 'crm_node >>>>>>>>> -l'. Although node seems to be deleted correctly. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> For reference, output of crm_node -l is: >>>>>>>>> 7 v02-c >>>>>>>>> 8 v02-d >>>>>>>>> 5 v02-a >>>>>>>>> 6 v02-b >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This time the node state was empty. Or it's missing altogether. >>>>>>>> I'm not sure how's that supposed to be interpreted. We test the >>>>>>>> output of crm_node -l just to make sure that the node is not >>>>>>>> online. Perhaps we need to use some other command. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Likely it shows everything from a corosync nodelist. >>>>>>> After I deleted the node from everywhere except corosync, list is still >>>>>>> the same. >>>>>> >>>>>> OK. This patch changes the interface to crm_node to use the >>>>>> "list partition" option (-p). Could you please test it? >>>>> >>>>> Nope. Not enough. Even worse than before. I tested todays tip as it >>>>> includes that patch with merge of Andrew's public and private master >>>>> heads. >>>>> ========= >>>>> [root@v02-b ~]# crm node show >>>>> v02-a(5): normal >>>>> standby: off >>>>> virtualization: true >>>>> $id: nodes-5 >>>>> v02-b(6): normal >>>>> standby: off >>>>> virtualization: true >>>>> v02-c(7): normal >>>>> standby: off >>>>> virtualization: true >>>>> v02-d(8): normal(offline) >>>>> standby: off >>>>> virtualization: true >>>>> [root@v02-b ~]# crm node delete v02-d >>>>> ERROR: according to crm_node, node v02-d is still active >>>>> [root@v02-b ~]# crm_node -p >>>>> v02-c v02-d v02-a v02-b >>>>> [root@v02-b ~]# crm_node -l >>>>> 7 v02-c >>>>> 8 v02-d >>>>> 5 v02-a >>>>> 6 v02-b >>>>> [root@v02-b ~]# >>>>> ========= >>>>> >>>>> That is after I stopped node, lowered votequorum expected_votes (with >>>>> corosync-quorumtool) and deleted v02-d from a cmap nodelist. >>>>> >>>>> corosync-cmapctl still shows runtime info about deleted node as well: >>>>> runtime.totem.pg.mrp.srp.members.8.config_version (u64) = 0 >>>>> runtime.totem.pg.mrp.srp.members.8.ip (str) = r(0) ip(10.5.4.55) >>>>> runtime.totem.pg.mrp.srp.members.8.join_count (u32) = 1 >>>>> runtime.totem.pg.mrp.srp.members.8.status (str) = left >>>>> And it is not allowed to delete that keys. >>>>> >>>>> crm_node -R did the job (nothing left in the CIB), but, v02-d still >>>>> appears in its output for both -p and -l. >>>>> >>>>> Andrew, I copy you directly because above is probably to you. Shouldn't >>>>> crm_node some-how show that stopped node is deleted from a corosync >>>>> nodelist? >>>> >>>> Which stack is this? >>> >>> corosync 2.3 with nodelist and udpu. >> >> I assume its possible, but crm_node isn't smart enough to do that yet. >> Feel like writing a patch? :) > > Shouldn't it just skip offline nodes for -p? > Worse. It appears to be asking pacemakerd instead of corosync or crmd. _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
