On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Vladislav Bogdanov <bub...@hoster-ok.com> wrote: > 09.12.2011 03:11, Andrew Beekhof wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 1:32 AM, Vladislav Bogdanov <bub...@hoster-ok.com> >> wrote: >>> Hi Andrew, >>> >>> I investigated on my test cluster what actually happens with dlm and >>> fencing. >>> >>> I added more debug messages to dlm dump, and also did a re-kick of nodes >>> after some time. >>> >>> Results are that stonith history actually doesn't contain any >>> information until pacemaker decides to fence node itself. >> >> ... >> >>> From my PoV that means that the call to >>> crm_terminate_member_no_mainloop() does not actually schedule fencing >>> operation. >> >> You're going to have to remind me... what does your copy of >> crm_terminate_member_no_mainloop() look like? >> This is with the non-cman editions of the controlds too right? > > Just latest github's version. You changed some dlm_controld.pcmk > functionality, so it asks stonithd for fencing results instead of XML > magic. But call to crm_terminate_member_no_mainloop() remains the same > there. But yes, that version communicates stonithd directly too. > > SO, the problem here is just with crm_terminate_member_no_mainloop() > which for some reason skips actual fencing request.
There should be some logs, either indicating that it tried, or that it failed. > Side note: shouldn't that wait_fencing_done functionality where it asks > for stonith history be moved to crm API as well? potentially _______________________________________________ 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 Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
