On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 6:39 PM Dave Withheld <davewithh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 8:03 AM Dave Withheld <davewithh...@hotmail.com> > wrote: > > In our production factory, we run a 2-node cluster on CentOS 8 with > pacemaker, a virtual IP, and drbd for shared storage with samba (among > other services) running as a resource on the active node. Everything works > great except when we fail over. All resources are moved to the other node > and start just fine, but Windows hosts that have connections to the samba > shares all have to be rebooted before they can reconnect. Clients that > were not connected can connect. We have samba configured for only SMB1 > protocol and all Windows clients are configured to allow it. > > >>Did you test if it is samba/smb-client related or windows IP-stack > related - like ping the samba-host from the windows machines? > >>Is the virtual IP using the physical MAC address of the interface - like > windows missing the gratuitous ARP? > > Not just ping, but several other services (custom daemons, http, Mariadb, > etc) all connect seamlessly. It's only the samba connections that don't > (obviously ping works, too). > > As for the MAC address, it is the same: ip a shows two IPs for the > interface but only one link/ether. > > This server (2-node cluster) is replacing an old system I built in 2008, > which used heartbeat (no pacemaker or corosync) and had a much older > version of samba. It had no problem failing over: mapped drives on the > Windows clients worked just as well after a failover as they did before and > UNCs worked seamlessly, as well. In fact, the few times it failed over, no > one even knew it until we saw a message in our emails sent by the servers > when the resources moved. > > On the old system, ifconfig showed an eth0 interface, as well as an eth0:0 > interface on the active node which the virtual IP. The docs called the > virtual IP an "alias". On the new server, ifconfig does not show the > virtual IP at all and I have to use "ip a" to see the two addresses on one > interface. I tried using the command "ifconfig eno1:0 XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX up" > to manually add an IP in a similar manner to the old server and the address > I added did show up in ifconfig. The point is, the virtual address is > being added differently and I suspect the Windows clients treat it > differently. > > I will be looking closely at the resource agents and see how they > compare. If any of this rings a bell, I would love to hear more from > anyong with experience. Thanks! > Sry didn't say I had a clue for you. Just thought this info was missing ;-) My personal experience with samba is both minimal and dated. What you could do - if nobody has a clue - would be capturing the traffic - both cases if the old setup is still available. Klaus > > >>Klaus > > Maybe this is a question for the samba folks, but thought I'd try here > first since it's only a problem when the other node takes over the samba > resource. Anyone seen this problem and solved it? > _______________________________________________ > 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/
