Hi, On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 05:26:19PM +0200, Markus M. wrote: > Markus M. wrote: > >is there a known problem with IPaddr(2) when defining many (in my > >case: 11) ip resources which are started/stopped concurrently?
Don't remember any problems. > Well... some further investigation revealed that it seems to be a > problem with the way how the ip addresses are assigned. > > When looking at the output of "ip addr", the first ip address added > to the interface gets the scope "global", all further aliases gets > the scope "global secondary". > > If afterwards the first ip address is removed before the secondaries > (due to concurrently run of the scripts), ALL secondaries are > removed at the same time by the "ip" command, leading to an error > for all subsequent trials to remove the other ip addresses because > they are already gone. > > I am not sure how "ip" decides for the "secondary" scope, maybe > beacuse the other ip addresses are in the same subnet as the first > one. That sounds bad. Instances should be independent of each other. Can you please open a bugzilla and attach a hb_report. Thanks, Dejan > Regards > Markus > > _______________________________________________ > Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org > http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker > > Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf _______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
