Dell - Internal Use - Confidential Hello, Background: We are trying to introduce clustering to our embedded environment Our environment includes following packages and modules for the initial test:
1. Pacemaker - version 1.1.10 2. Corosync - version 2.3.4 3. Corosync.conf file find it attached to this email thread 4. 2 Nodes in the cluster (master and slave) 5. Test app1 that publishes some sensor data (only Master node publishes, slave node just receives the data) 6. Test app2 that receives the published data and outputs on the screen (only master node outputs the data on the screen) Our test has been successful and we are able to create a cluster with 2 nodes and everything seems to be working fine. However, we are observed that corosync is consuming about 100MB of RAM when both the test applications are alive. 100M is a lot memory... Problem: We would like to know if there are any configuration settings or tuning that we need to perform to reduce the memory usage. It is very critical to reduce the memory consumption as we are running it in embedded environment. We have talked with the pacemaker mailing list. We have tried 1. Reduce the PCMK_ipc_buffer 2. Change the PCMK_ipc_buffer from shared memory to socket memory. The memory for corosync is still consuming 100MB. More data below.... Data: Virt Res Shr PCMK_ipc_buffer PCMK_ipc_type Corosync 100m 99m 69m 5128 Socket corosync 100m 97m 69m 5128 share Process Virt res Attrd 21308 2744 Cib 29608 9676 Crmd 72932 5152 Pacemaker 31380 2636 Stonithd 23072 4028 lrmd 10448 3012 Df /dev/shm with the PCMK_ipc_type set to socket printed the following. Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on tmpfs 124812 33492 91320 27% /dev/shm The IPC portion is using about 27% of the memory aka 33.5m. Thanks, Heidi Maeder -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Christine Caulfield Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 3:37 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [corosync] Node id uniqueness is not checked On 28/01/15 07:56, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote: > Hi! > > Just discovered that corosync doesn't check uniqueness of the node id > in the config file (did't check is that true for online udpu member add). > > That leads to an abort on a node listed later in config. Other node > becomes unresponsive (I tested in two-node cluster, so cannot say > about other nodes in bigger cluster). > > It would be nice to add a check so 'corosync -t' complains. > That's a really good suggestion, I'll add it to my 'To Do' list. Thank you. Chrissie _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
