On Mon, 2019-05-20 at 23:15 +0200, Kadlecsik József wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 20 May 2019, Ken Gaillot wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2019-05-20 at 15:29 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> > > What worries me is "Rejecting name for unique".
> >
> > Trace messages are often not user-friendly. The
Hi,
On Mon, 20 May 2019, Ken Gaillot wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-05-20 at 15:29 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> > What worries me is "Rejecting name for unique".
>
> Trace messages are often not user-friendly. The rejecting/accepting is
> nothing to be concerned about; it just refers to which
On Mon, 2019-05-20 at 15:29 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> What worries me is "Rejecting name for unique".
Trace messages are often not user-friendly. The rejecting/accepting is
nothing to be concerned about; it just refers to which parameters are
being used to calculate that particular hash.
What worries me is "Rejecting name for unique".
>>> Kadlecsik József schrieb am 20.05.2019
um
14:37 in Nachricht :
> On Sun, 19 May 2019, Kadlecsik József wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 18 May 2019, Kadlecsik József wrote:
>>
>> > On Sat, 18 May 2019, Kadlecsik József wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Sat, 18 May
On 20/05/19 08:28 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
>> One network interface is gone for a short period. But it's in a
>> bonding device (round-robin), so the connection shouldn't be lost.
>> Both nodes are connected directly, there is no switch in between.
>
> I think you misunderstood: a round-robin
>>> "Lentes, Bernd" schrieb am 16.05.2019
um
17:10 in Nachricht
<1151882511.6631123.1558019430655.javamail.zim...@helmholtz-muenchen.de>:
> Hi,
>
> my HA-Cluster with two nodes fenced one on 14th of may.
> ha-idg-1 has been the DC, ha-idg-2 was fenced.
> It happened around 11:30 am.
> The log
