[ClusterLabs] kronosnet v1.13 released
All, We are pleased to announce the general availability of kronosnet v1.13 kronosnet (or knet for short) is the new underlying network protocol for Linux HA components (corosync), that features the ability to use multiple links between nodes, active/active and active/passive link failover policies, automatic link recovery, FIPS compliant encryption (nss and/or openssl), automatic PMTUd and in general better performances compared to the old network protocol. Highlights in this release: * IMPORTANT/URGENT: fix defrag buffer reclaim logic that could lead knet to deliver corrupted data to the application (corosync or alike). * IMPORTANT/URGENT: fix MTU boundary check on links with very high packet loss and avoid delivering corrupted (short) data to the application. * Optimize reassembly of defrag packets by avoid unnecessary memmoves. * Improvements to the test suite to deal with the above bugs and potentially reduce regressions in future. * Minor stability fixes to the test suite. Known issues in this release: *none The source tarballs can be downloaded here: https://www.kronosnet.org/releases/ Upstream resources and contacts: https://kronosnet.org/ https://github.com/kronosnet/kronosnet/ https://ci.kronosnet.org/ https://trello.com/kronosnet (TODO list and activities tracking) https://goo.gl/9ZvkLS (google shared drive with presentations and diagrams) IRC: #kronosnet on Freenode https://lists.kronosnet.org/mailman/listinfo/users https://lists.kronosnet.org/mailman/listinfo/devel https://lists.kronosnet.org/mailman/listinfo/commits Cheers, The knet developer team ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
Re: [ClusterLabs] Apache doesn't start under corosync with systemd
>mailto:kgail...@redhat.com] >Sent: Monday, October 14, 2019 12:02 PM > >If you have SELinux enabled, check for denials. The cluster processes have a >different SELinux context than systemd, so policies might not be set up >correctly. >-- >Ken Gaillot Alas, SELinux is not in use. I am thinking that the apache OCF module is not starting up apache with the modules that it needs. Again, startup with 'systemctl start apache' brings up the http daemons, so we know that the Apache configuration is clean. But if I enable trace and run the ocf script by hand: export OCF_TRACE_RA=1 /usr/lib/ocf/resource.d/heartbeat/apache start ; echo $? Part of the output is Apache syntax errors that aren't flagged in the regular startup: + 14:57:10: ocf_run:443: ocf_log err 'AH00526: Syntax error on line 22 of /etc/apache2/vhosts.d/aqvslookup.conf: Invalid command '\''Order'\'', perhaps misspelled or defined by a module not included in the server configuration ' The 'Allow' and ' AuthLDAPURL' commands are also flagged as invalid. The /etc/sysconfig/apache2 module parameter includes the relevant modules: APACHE_MODULES="actions alias auth_basic authn_file authz_host authz_groupfile authz_core authz_user autoindex cgi dir env expires include log_config mime negotiation setenvif ssl socache_shmcb userdir reqtimeout authn_core php5 rewrite ldap authnz_ldap status access_compat" Why are they invoked properly from systemctl but not from ocf? John Reynolds ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
[ClusterLabs] Pacemaker and corosync on Openshift
Hi Team, Thanks for your support, Actually we are facing issue in running PCS in a pod on openshift. Scenario :- We have two zabbix VM's which are running in a PCS cluster. Now we want that pod in the VM pcs cluster, We have already install the packages and start the pcsd service in the pod. Machine IP :- VM 1 :- 10.0.8.98 VM 2:- 10.0.8.99 POD IP :- 10.0.244.8 and its service ip from which we have access that container is 10.0.8.120 (and form this service ip we have successfully telnet it on 2443) Autorization/setup cluster happen successfully from service ip. But in the pod the pcs cluster is not started on the service ip giving error no interface define, but if we have mention the pod ip it will start but not communication with outer world. Requesting you to please help us in this , and suggest us how we can configured it on service ip. Thanks in advance waiting for your response Thanks & Regards, Shashank Senior Member Technical Staff-ITPF Mob: 91-989625 NEC Technologies India Private Limited, 5th Floor, Building 9, Unitech Infospace SEZ of Seaview Developers Plot 20/21 Sector-135 Noida, 201304, Uttar Pradesh, INDIA The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and intended for the named recipient(s) only. It shall not attach any liability on the originator or NECTI or its affiliates. Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of NECTI or its affiliates. Any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution and / or publication of this message without the prior written consent of the author of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please delete it and notify the sender immediately. ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: DLM, cLVM, GFS2 and OCFS2 managed by systemd instead of crm ?
- On Oct 16, 2019, at 8:27 AM, Digimer li...@alteeve.ca wrote: > On 2019-10-16 2:16 a.m., Ulrich Windl wrote: > "Lentes, Bernd" schrieb am 15.10.2019 >> um >> 21:35 in Nachricht >> <1922568650.3402980.1571168140600.javamail.zim...@helmholtz-muenchen.de>: >>> Hi, >>> >>> i'm a big fan of simple solutions (KISS). >>> Currently i have DLM, cLVM, GFS2 and OCFS2 managed by pacemaker. >>> They all are fundamental prerequisites for my resources (Virtual Domains). >>> To configure them i used clones and groups. >>> Why not having them managed by systemd to make the cluster setup more >>> overseeable ? >>> >>> Is there a strong reason that pacemaker cares about them ? >> >> AFAIK, DLM (others maybe too) need the cluster infrastructure (comminication >> layer) to be operable. >> Also I consider systemd handling resources being worse than pacemaker. >> What is your specific problem? Keeping the cluster configuration simple while >> moving complexity to systemd? >> >> Do you know one command to describe your systemd configuration as short as >> the >> cluster configuration (like crm configuration show)? >> >> Regards, >> Ulrich > > This is correct. DLM uses corosync. OK. I understand. I will stay with pacemaker. Thanks for all answers. Bernd Helmholtz Zentrum Muenchen Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer Gesundheit und Umwelt (GmbH) Ingolstaedter Landstr. 1 85764 Neuherberg www.helmholtz-muenchen.de Aufsichtsratsvorsitzende: MinDir'in Prof. Dr. Veronika von Messling Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof. Dr. med. Dr. h.c. Matthias Tschoep, Kerstin Guenther Registergericht: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 6466 USt-IdNr: DE 129521671 ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: DLM, cLVM, GFS2 and OCFS2 managed by systemd instead of crm ?
On 10/16/19 3:19 PM, Ulrich Windl wrote: Roger Zhou schrieb am 16.10.2019 um 08:54 in Nachricht > : >> Hi Bernd, >> >> Apart from Ken's insights. >> >> I try to put it simple between systemd vs. pacemaker: >> >> pacemaker does manage dependencies among nodes, well, systemd just not. > > What I also wanted to say is (maybe the reason for Bernd's message) that many > examples how to configure OCFS or cLVM are very bad regarding extensibility: > If > you follow the instructions for OCFS2, and then you want to follow the > instructions for cLVM (just one example), you get a conflict as DLM already is > configured, and it's not very clear how to resolve dependencies correctly. If > you do it cLVM first, then OCFS2, you have the same problem. Likewise for > clustered RAID. My understanding of your feedback, and probably the same from Bernd, roots back to "KISS". For that, I think agree. Well, those projects(components) under ClusterLabs umbrella are the ingredients to cook the meal. But, it does not provide the meal directly, so to say. One of the challenge here is to identify those solid solutions, and to figure out the mutual benefit among parties of this community. For those parties buy-in this, we can work together to add features to simplify configuration, deployment, and orchestration of the solutions, to make the KISS things, etc. If it happens, it is really cool! Well, sounds, my saying starts toward business oriented, and I hope you don't mind ;) BR, Roger > > Regards, > Ulrich > >> >> Cheers, >> Roger >> >> On 10/16/19 5:16 AM, Ken Gaillot wrote: >>> On Tue, 2019‑10‑15 at 21:35 +0200, Lentes, Bernd wrote: Hi, i'm a big fan of simple solutions (KISS). Currently i have DLM, cLVM, GFS2 and OCFS2 managed by pacemaker. They all are fundamental prerequisites for my resources (Virtual Domains). To configure them i used clones and groups. Why not having them managed by systemd to make the cluster setup more overseeable ? Is there a strong reason that pacemaker cares about them ? Bernd >>> >>> Either approach is reasonable. The advantages of keeping them in >>> pacemaker are: >>> >>> ‑ Service‑aware recurring monitor (if OCF) >>> >>> ‑ If one of those components fails, pacemaker will know to try to >>> recover everything in the group from that point, and if necessary, >>> fence the node and recover the virtual domain elsewhere (if they're in >>> systemd, pacemaker will only know that the virtual domain has failed, >>> and likely keep trying to restart it fruitlessly) >>> >>> ‑ Convenience of things like putting a node in standby mode, and >>> checking resource status on all nodes with one command >>> >>> If you do move them to systemd, be sure to use the resource‑agents‑deps >>> target to ensure they're started before pacemaker and stopped after >>> pacemaker. >>> >> ___ >> Manage your subscription: >> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users >> >> ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ > > > > ___ > Manage your subscription: > https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ > ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
[ClusterLabs] resource-agents v4.4.0 rc1
ClusterLabs is happy to announce resource-agents v4.4.0 rc1. Source code is available at: https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/releases/tag/v4.4.0rc1 The most significant enhancements in this release are: - bugfixes and enhancements: - All RA: Use _default variables for all parameters - Build: improvements and fixes to make "make rpm" work on all archs in CI - CTDB: add support for v4.9+ - Delay: protect grep regex argument from shell globbing - Filesystem: don't call readlink on path if it doesnt exist - Filesystem: fix to avoid killing all root user processeswhen bind mounting a directory on / - Filesystem: improve "/" check for bind mounts - IPaddr2: fix to work properly with unsanitized IPv6 addresses - IPsrcaddr: add destination and table parameters - LVM-activate: add partial-activation support - LVM-activate: fix monitor might hang due to lvm_validate, which was added by accident - LVM-activate: move pvscan --cache to validate - Route: dont fence node when parameters arent set - apache: check if SUSE binaries are executable - apache: fix to also detect mod_status.so when it is a symlink - apache: improve PidFile pattern to support multiple instances - apache: load status module on SUSE distros - aws-vpc-route53: improved API error handling and fix to avoid race-condition during probe - aws-vpc-route53: replace ec2metada with curl to fetch the IP address directly from EC2 metadata - azure-lb: add support for using socat instead of nc - docker: improve the check for the docker daemon being up - exportfs: doc clarification for clientspec format - gcp-pd-move: add stackdriver_logging parameter - iSCSILogicalUnit: only create acls if it doesnt exist - mysql/mariadb/galera: use runuser/su to avoid using SELinux DAC_OVERRIDE - mysql: add support for SSL replication - nfsserver: performance improvements for systemd enabled systems - ora-common: fix to fail when sid parameter is invalid - podman: generate drop-in dependencies for podman containers - podman: only use exec to manage container's lifecycle - rabbitmq-cluster: also restore users/perms/policies when starting in single node mode - redis: fix master_is_active() erroneously reporting there is master when there is not (fixes issue #1399) - redis: use optimal password passing method and warning filtering workaround The full list of changes for resource-agents is available at: https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/blob/v4.4.0rc1/ChangeLog Everyone is encouraged to download and test the new release candidate. We do many regression tests and simulations, but we can't cover all possible use cases, so your feedback is important and appreciated. Many thanks to all the contributors to this release. Best, The resource-agents maintainers ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
[ClusterLabs] Antw: Where is the syntax for parameter types?
>>> Ulrich Windl schrieb am 16.10.2019 um 10:53 in Nachricht <5DA6DA93.232 :
>>> 161 :
60728>:
> Hi!
>
> I just discovered an interesting problem with my own RA that allows a
> boolean parameter:
> Where is the exact syntax for "boolean" defined, and who's responsible for
> checking it? The RA or (e.g.) crm?
Inspecting my RA, I realized that my "validate-all" DOES check the value, so it
seems crm's validate does not call the RA's validate. Part of my code is:
if [ "X${logrotate//[^01]/}" != "X${logrotate}" ]; then
ocf_exit_reason "$me: invalid value $logrotate for \"logrotate\""
result=$OCF_ERR_CONFIGURED
fi
[...]
My test script outputs (I added a new test with an invalid Boolean):
...
ocf/tester: Using parameter file ocf/isredir-test3.params
ocf-exit-reason:validate: invalid value true for "logrotate"
ocf/tester: Exit status of validate-all is 6
ocf/tester: Parameter file ocf/isredir-test3.params done
...
ocf/tester: Using parameter file ocf/isredir-test3.params
Beginning tests for ocf/isredir...
* rc=6: Validation failed. Did you supply enough options with -o ?
ocf-exit-reason:validate: invalid value true for "logrotate"
Aborting tests
ocf/tester: Exit status is 1
ocf/tester: Parameter file ocf/isredir-test3.params done
Regards,
Ulrich
___
Manage your subscription:
https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
[ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: Where is the syntax for parameter types?
>>> Oyvind Albrigtsen schrieb am 16.10.2019 um 11:02 in
Nachricht <20191016090219.z5jz4tnd5hxi7...@redhat.com>:
> On 16/10/19 10:53 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
>>Hi!
>>
>>I just discovered an interesting problem with my own RA that allows a
boolean
> parameter:
>>Where is the exact syntax for "boolean" defined, and who's responsible for
> checking it? The RA or (e.g.) crm?
>>The concrete problem is that my RA expected the boolean parameter to be
> either '0' or '1', but crm shell was happy with the value "true".
>>So where is the document describing the parameter types' syntax, and who is
> responsible for checking that? RA's validate‑all?
> This is done by the validate‑all action for the RA.
>
> Sounds like the agent should use "ocf_is_true" instead of checking
> against a specific value.
In addition to what I had said before (doesn't help the user when enetring),
the function is like this:
ocf_is_true() {
case "$1" in
yes|true|1|YES|TRUE|True|ja|on|ON) true ;;
*) false ;;
esac
}
Probably the Spanish and French envy Germans now ;-)
(their "yes" isn't included)
So it seems:
The management tools do not "normalize" Boolean values, but keep them "as is",
and they don't verify those. Id' still prefer some concrete syntax, so that a
Boolean is either true, false or an error.
The implementation treats everything not "true" as "false" which is basically
a wrong implementation:
If you have ocf_is_decimal() returning true if the syntax is a decimal number,
the corresponding function for Boolean is not ocf_is_true(), but
ocf_is_boolean(), returning flase if the value is not Boolean (not if the value
isn't "true").
This isn't a well-designed library of functions.
So if you add an ocf_is_false() (which is NOT !ocf_is_true()), you could
write
if ! ocf_is_false $val && ! ocf_is_true $val
then
error "$val is not a Boolean value"
fi
Or:
ocf_is_boolean()
{
ocf_is_false "$1" || ocf_is_true "$1"
}
Regards,
Ulrich
>
> Feel free to create a pull request or issue on
> https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource‑agents.
>
>
> Oyvind
>>
>>Regards,
>>Ulrich
>>
>>
>>___
>>Manage your subscription:
>>https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
> ___
> Manage your subscription:
> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
___
Manage your subscription:
https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
[ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: Where is the syntax for parameter types?
>>> Oyvind Albrigtsen schrieb am 16.10.2019 um 11:02 in Nachricht <20191016090219.z5jz4tnd5hxi7...@redhat.com>: > On 16/10/19 10:53 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote: >>Hi! >> >>I just discovered an interesting problem with my own RA that allows a boolean > parameter: >>Where is the exact syntax for "boolean" defined, and who's responsible for > checking it? The RA or (e.g.) crm? >>The concrete problem is that my RA expected the boolean parameter to be > either '0' or '1', but crm shell was happy with the value "true". >>So where is the document describing the parameter types' syntax, and who is > responsible for checking that? RA's validate‑all? > This is done by the validate‑all action for the RA. > > Sounds like the agent should use "ocf_is_true" instead of checking > against a specific value. Still this doesn't help the user who's going to enter the (e.g.) Boolean value. > > Feel free to create a pull request or issue on > https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource‑agents. > > > Oyvind >> >>Regards, >>Ulrich >> >> >>___ >>Manage your subscription: >>https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users >> >>ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ > ___ > Manage your subscription: > https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
[ClusterLabs] Antw: Where is the syntax for parameter types?
>>> "Ulrich Windl" schrieb am 16.10.2019 um 10:53 in Nachricht <5da6da9302a100034...@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de>: > Hi! > > I just discovered an interesting problem with my own RA that allows a > boolean parameter: > Where is the exact syntax for "boolean" defined, and who's responsible for > checking it? The RA or (e.g.) crm? > The concrete problem is that my RA expected the boolean parameter to be > either '0' or '1', but crm shell was happy with the value "true". > So where is the document describing the parameter types' syntax, and who is > responsible for checking that? RA's validate‑all? In the meantime I had set the value to "grue" instead of "true", and crm's "verify" is happy with that, too... > > Regards, > Ulrich > > > ___ > Manage your subscription: > https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
Re: [ClusterLabs] Where is the syntax for parameter types?
On 16/10/19 10:53 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote: Hi! I just discovered an interesting problem with my own RA that allows a boolean parameter: Where is the exact syntax for "boolean" defined, and who's responsible for checking it? The RA or (e.g.) crm? The concrete problem is that my RA expected the boolean parameter to be either '0' or '1', but crm shell was happy with the value "true". So where is the document describing the parameter types' syntax, and who is responsible for checking that? RA's validate-all? This is done by the validate-all action for the RA. Sounds like the agent should use "ocf_is_true" instead of checking against a specific value. Feel free to create a pull request or issue on https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents. Oyvind Regards, Ulrich ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
[ClusterLabs] Antw: What happened to "crm resource migrate"?
>>> Ulrich Windl schrieb am 15.10.2019 um 10:26 in Nachricht <5DA582C3.BDB : >>> 161 : 60728>: > Hi! > > I was trying to do a "crm resource migrate" the first time in SLES 12 (the > way I did in SLES11), but I got this message: > # crm resource migrate prm_isr_mail1 PT10M > ERROR: resource.move: No target node: Move requires either a target node or > 'force' > I retried today; seems a bug in crm shell: # crm resource migrate prm_isr_mail1 PT10M ERROR: resource.move: No target node: Move requires either a target node or 'force' # crm_resource -M -r prm_isr_mail1 --lifetime PT10M Migration will take effect until: 2019-10-16 10:28:20 +02:00 WARNING: Creating rsc_location constraint 'cli-ban-prm_isr_mail1-on-h12' with a score of -INFINITY for resource prm_isr_mail1 on h12. This will prevent prm_isr_mail1 from running on h12 until the constraint is removed using the clear option or by editing the CIB with an appropriate tool This will be the case even if h12 is the last node in the cluster > I'm surprised: In the past the mommand simply added a negative location for > the node the was running (at least I think). > The resource was running on the other node of a two-node cluster... > > Also I noticed that "migrate" no longer appears in crm's help for > "resource". There's only a "move". > > Help for "move" still says: > resource# help move > Move a resource to another node > > Move a resource away from its current location. > ... > > Regards, > Ulrich > > ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
[ClusterLabs] Where is the syntax for parameter types?
Hi! I just discovered an interesting problem with my own RA that allows a boolean parameter: Where is the exact syntax for "boolean" defined, and who's responsible for checking it? The RA or (e.g.) crm? The concrete problem is that my RA expected the boolean parameter to be either '0' or '1', but crm shell was happy with the value "true". So where is the document describing the parameter types' syntax, and who is responsible for checking that? RA's validate-all? Regards, Ulrich ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
[ClusterLabs] DRBD on CentOS8 anyone?
Hi, did anybody succeed in installing / compiling DRBD for CentOS8? It seems to cause some trouble in my setup. Michael Schwartzkopff Mit freundlichen Grüßen, -- [*] sys4 AG https://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64 Schleißheimer Straße 26/MG,80333 München Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263 Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Marc Schiffbauer, Wolfgang Stief Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
[ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: DLM, cLVM, GFS2 and OCFS2 managed by systemd instead of crm ?
>>> Roger Zhou schrieb am 16.10.2019 um 08:54 in Nachricht : > Hi Bernd, > > Apart from Ken's insights. > > I try to put it simple between systemd vs. pacemaker: > > pacemaker does manage dependencies among nodes, well, systemd just not. What I also wanted to say is (maybe the reason for Bernd's message) that many examples how to configure OCFS or cLVM are very bad regarding extensibility: If you follow the instructions for OCFS2, and then you want to follow the instructions for cLVM (just one example), you get a conflict as DLM already is configured, and it's not very clear how to resolve dependencies correctly. If you do it cLVM first, then OCFS2, you have the same problem. Likewise for clustered RAID. Regards, Ulrich > > Cheers, > Roger > > On 10/16/19 5:16 AM, Ken Gaillot wrote: >> On Tue, 2019‑10‑15 at 21:35 +0200, Lentes, Bernd wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> i'm a big fan of simple solutions (KISS). >>> Currently i have DLM, cLVM, GFS2 and OCFS2 managed by pacemaker. >>> They all are fundamental prerequisites for my resources (Virtual >>> Domains). >>> To configure them i used clones and groups. >>> Why not having them managed by systemd to make the cluster setup more >>> overseeable ? >>> >>> Is there a strong reason that pacemaker cares about them ? >>> >>> Bernd >> >> Either approach is reasonable. The advantages of keeping them in >> pacemaker are: >> >> ‑ Service‑aware recurring monitor (if OCF) >> >> ‑ If one of those components fails, pacemaker will know to try to >> recover everything in the group from that point, and if necessary, >> fence the node and recover the virtual domain elsewhere (if they're in >> systemd, pacemaker will only know that the virtual domain has failed, >> and likely keep trying to restart it fruitlessly) >> >> ‑ Convenience of things like putting a node in standby mode, and >> checking resource status on all nodes with one command >> >> If you do move them to systemd, be sure to use the resource‑agents‑deps >> target to ensure they're started before pacemaker and stopped after >> pacemaker. >> > ___ > Manage your subscription: > https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
Re: [ClusterLabs] DLM, cLVM, GFS2 and OCFS2 managed by systemd instead of crm ?
Hi Bernd, Apart from Ken's insights. I try to put it simple between systemd vs. pacemaker: pacemaker does manage dependencies among nodes, well, systemd just not. Cheers, Roger On 10/16/19 5:16 AM, Ken Gaillot wrote: > On Tue, 2019-10-15 at 21:35 +0200, Lentes, Bernd wrote: >> Hi, >> >> i'm a big fan of simple solutions (KISS). >> Currently i have DLM, cLVM, GFS2 and OCFS2 managed by pacemaker. >> They all are fundamental prerequisites for my resources (Virtual >> Domains). >> To configure them i used clones and groups. >> Why not having them managed by systemd to make the cluster setup more >> overseeable ? >> >> Is there a strong reason that pacemaker cares about them ? >> >> Bernd > > Either approach is reasonable. The advantages of keeping them in > pacemaker are: > > - Service-aware recurring monitor (if OCF) > > - If one of those components fails, pacemaker will know to try to > recover everything in the group from that point, and if necessary, > fence the node and recover the virtual domain elsewhere (if they're in > systemd, pacemaker will only know that the virtual domain has failed, > and likely keep trying to restart it fruitlessly) > > - Convenience of things like putting a node in standby mode, and > checking resource status on all nodes with one command > > If you do move them to systemd, be sure to use the resource-agents-deps > target to ensure they're started before pacemaker and stopped after > pacemaker. > ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: DLM, cLVM, GFS2 and OCFS2 managed by systemd instead of crm ?
On 2019-10-16 2:16 a.m., Ulrich Windl wrote: "Lentes, Bernd" schrieb am 15.10.2019 > um > 21:35 in Nachricht > <1922568650.3402980.1571168140600.javamail.zim...@helmholtz-muenchen.de>: >> Hi, >> >> i'm a big fan of simple solutions (KISS). >> Currently i have DLM, cLVM, GFS2 and OCFS2 managed by pacemaker. >> They all are fundamental prerequisites for my resources (Virtual Domains). >> To configure them i used clones and groups. >> Why not having them managed by systemd to make the cluster setup more >> overseeable ? >> >> Is there a strong reason that pacemaker cares about them ? > > AFAIK, DLM (others maybe too) need the cluster infrastructure (comminication > layer) to be operable. > Also I consider systemd handling resources being worse than pacemaker. > What is your specific problem? Keeping the cluster configuration simple while > moving complexity to systemd? > > Do you know one command to describe your systemd configuration as short as the > cluster configuration (like crm configuration show)? > > Regards, > Ulrich This is correct. DLM uses corosync. -- Digimer Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.com/w/ "I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops." - Stephen Jay Gould ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
[ClusterLabs] Antw: DLM, cLVM, GFS2 and OCFS2 managed by systemd instead of crm ?
>>> "Lentes, Bernd" schrieb am 15.10.2019 um 21:35 in Nachricht <1922568650.3402980.1571168140600.javamail.zim...@helmholtz-muenchen.de>: > Hi, > > i'm a big fan of simple solutions (KISS). > Currently i have DLM, cLVM, GFS2 and OCFS2 managed by pacemaker. > They all are fundamental prerequisites for my resources (Virtual Domains). > To configure them i used clones and groups. > Why not having them managed by systemd to make the cluster setup more > overseeable ? > > Is there a strong reason that pacemaker cares about them ? AFAIK, DLM (others maybe too) need the cluster infrastructure (comminication layer) to be operable. Also I consider systemd handling resources being worse than pacemaker. What is your specific problem? Keeping the cluster configuration simple while moving complexity to systemd? Do you know one command to describe your systemd configuration as short as the cluster configuration (like crm configuration show)? Regards, Ulrich > > Bernd > > -- > > Bernd Lentes > Systemadministration > Institut für Entwicklungsgenetik > Gebäude 35.34 - Raum 208 > HelmholtzZentrum münchen > bernd.len...@helmholtz-muenchen.de > phone: +49 89 3187 1241 > phone: +49 89 3187 3827 > fax: +49 89 3187 2294 > http://www.helmholtz-muenchen.de/idg > > Perfekt ist wer keine Fehler macht > Also sind Tote perfekt > > > Helmholtz Zentrum Muenchen > Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer Gesundheit und Umwelt (GmbH) > Ingolstaedter Landstr. 1 > 85764 Neuherberg > www.helmholtz-muenchen.de > Aufsichtsratsvorsitzende: MinDir'in Prof. Dr. Veronika von Messling > Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof. Dr. med. Dr. h.c. Matthias Tschoep, Kerstin > Guenther > Registergericht: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 6466 > USt-IdNr: DE 129521671 > > ___ > Manage your subscription: > https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
[ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: Antw: Coming in Pacemaker 2.0.3: crm_mon output changes
>>> Ken Gaillot schrieb am 15.10.2019 um 18:15 in Nachricht <8e638da987edbe3c2b158c705d5620726a021d8e.ca...@redhat.com>: > On Tue, 2019-10-15 at 08:42 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote: >> > > > Ken Gaillot schrieb am 15.10.2019 um >> > > > 00:47 in >> >> Nachricht >> : >> > Hi all, >> > >> > With Pacemaker 2.0.2, we introduced a new experimental option for >> > XML >> > output from stonith_admin. This was the test case for a new output >> > model for Pacemaker tools. I'm happy to say this has been extended >> > to >> > crm_mon and will be considered stable as of 2.0.3. >> > >> > crm_mon has always supported text, curses, HTML, and XML output, >> > and >> > that doesn't change. However the command‑line options for those >> > have >> > been deprecated and replaced with new forms: >> > >> > Old:New: >> > ‑‑as‑xml‑‑output‑as=xml >> > ‑‑as‑html=FILE ‑‑output‑as=html ‑‑output‑to=FILE >> > ‑‑web‑cgi ‑‑output‑as=html ‑‑output‑cgi >> > ‑‑disable‑ncurses ‑‑output‑as=text >> >> I'd prefer "--output-format|output-fmt|format" over "--format-as", >> because I >> think it's more clear. > > That's a good question, what it should be called. We chose --output-as > in 2.0.2 for stonith_admin, so that has some weight now. I think the > main reason was to keep it shorter for typing (there's no single-letter > equivalent at the moment because there's not an obvious choice > available across all tools). > > I'm open to changing it if there's a lot of demand for it, otherwise > I'd rather keep it compatible with 2.0.2. > >> Accordingly I'd prefer "--output-file" over "--output-to". > > I like the more generic meaning of this one. The new approach also > supports --output-to="-" for stdout (which is the default). One could > imagine adding some other non-file capability in the future. > >> Why not replace "--weg-cgi" with "--output-format=cgi"? > > CGI output is identical to HTML, with just a header change, so it was > logically more of an option to the HTML implementation rather than a > separate one. > > With the new approach, each format type may define any additional > options to modify its behavior, and all tools automatically inherit > those options. These will be grouped together in the help/man page. For > example, the HTML option help is: > > Output Options (html): > --output-cgi Add text needed to use output in a CGI > program > --output-meta-refresh=SECONDS How often to refresh God bless the long optionsm, but considering that the only thing that is refreshed in crm_mon's output is... well the output,,, why not just have --refresh or --refresh-interval. Also it wouldn't be too hard (if there's any demand) to allow suffixes like 's' for seconds, 'm' for minutes, and most likely more do not make sense for a refresh interval. > --output-stylesheet-link=URI Link to an external CSS stylesheet > --output-title=TITLE Page title > >> > >> > The new ‑‑output‑as and ‑‑output‑to options are identical to >> > stonith_admin's, and will eventually be supported by all Pacemaker >> > tools. Each tool may support a different set of formats; for >> > example, >> > stonith_admin supports text and xml. >> > >> > When called with ‑‑as‑xml, crm_mon's XML output will be identical >> > to >> > previous versions. When called with the new ‑‑output‑as=xml option, >> > it >> > will be slightly different: the outmost element will be a >> > > > result> element, which will be consistent across all tools. The old >> > XML >> >> Why not as simple "status" element? "-result" doesn't really add >> anything >> useful. > > We wanted the design to allow for future flexibility in how users ask > pacemaker to do something. The XML output would be the same whether the > request came from a command-line tool, GUI, C API client application, > REST API client, or any other future interface. The idea is that > might be a response to a . But most likely any response will be a kind of result, so why have "result" explicitly? Also as it's all about pacemaker, why have "pacemaker" in it? (Remember how easy it was to get rid of "heartbeat"? ;-)) So my argument for "status" simply is that the data describes the status. > > was also introduced with stonith_admin in 2.0.2, so > that carries some weight, but it was announced as experimental at the > time, so I'm open to changing the syntax if there's a clear preference > for an alternative. > >> > schema remains documented in crm_mon.rng; the new XML schema will >> > be >> > documented in an api‑result.rng schema that will encompass all >> > tools' >> > XML output. >> > >> > Beyond those interface changes, the text output displayed by >> > crm_mon >> > has been tweaked slightly. It is more organized with list headings >> > and >> > bullets. Hopefully you will find this easier to read. We welcome >> > any >> > feedback or suggestions for improvement. >> >> Older versions use a mixture of space for
