On 2017/8/9 下午7:32, Joseph Qi wrote:
> On 17/8/7 15:13, Changwei Ge wrote:
>> In current code, while flushing AST, we don't handle an exception that
>> sending AST or BAST is failed.
>> But it is indeed possible that AST or BAST is lost due to some kind of
>> networks fault.
> Could you please describe this issue more clearly? It is better analyze
> issue along with the error message and the status of related nodes.
> IMO, if network is down, one of the two nodes will be fenced. So what's
> your case here?
I have posted the status of related lock resource in my preceding email.
Please check them out.
Moreover, network is not down forever even not longer than threshold to
So no node will be fenced.
This issue happens in terrible network environment. Some messages may be
abandoned by switch due to various conditions.
And even frequent and fast link up and down will also cause this issue.
In a nutshell, re-queuing AST and BAST is crucial when link between
nodes recover quickly. It prevents cluster from hanging.
>> If above exception happens, the requesting node will never obtain an AST
>> back, hence, it will never acquire the lock or abort current locking.
>> With this patch, I'd like to fix this issue by re-queuing the AST or
>> BAST if sending is failed due to networks fault.
>> And the re-queuing AST or BAST will be dropped if the requesting node is
>> It will improve the reliability a lot.
> Ocfs2-devel mailing list
Ocfs2-devel mailing list