On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 09:26:09AM +0100, Ante Karamatic wrote:
> On 03.11.2010 11:34, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
>
> > Any news here?
>
> Yes. I know, it's been a while...
>
> At the time patch '2444'[1] was provided, glib had a bug[2] that was
> resolved few months later. 2444 patch did resolve
Hi all,
Any updates on this issue?
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Dave Williams <
d...@opensourcesolutions.co.uk> wrote:
> > > But this is what Senko's patch (2444.diff) fixes - so with that added
> it cures
> > > the abort in both situations above. Now time to look at his potential
> ref leak
> > But this is what Senko's patch (2444.diff) fixes - so with that added it
> > cures
> > the abort in both situations above. Now time to look at his potential ref
> > leak.
>
> That patch doesn't cure the cause, just works around it. lrmd
> would just keep accumulating open IPC sockets.
>
> T
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 10:51:56PM +, Dave Williams wrote:
> > To follow up it appears that lrmd is aborting with the same error
> > message after executing both "crm configure verify" AND "lrmadmin -C"
> >
> > Strace yields the following:
> >
> > lrmd: [336]: debug: on_receive_cmd: the
> To follow up it appears that lrmd is aborting with the same error
> message after executing both "crm configure verify" AND "lrmadmin -C"
>
> Strace yields the following:
>
> lrmd: [336]: debug: on_receive_cmd: the IPC to client [pid:342]
> disconnected.\n
> \nGThread-ERROR **: Trying to recur
>
> Adding the following patch
>
> --- lrmd.c 2010-11-19 17:51:44.0 +
> +++ ../../../lrmd.c 2010-11-24 20:40:49.351322794 +
> @@ -1104,6 +1104,9 @@
>
> register_pid(FALSE, sigterm_action);
>
> +
> + g_thread_init(NULL);
> +
> /* load RA plugins
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 09:47:51AM +0100, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Dejan Muhamedagic
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 10:52:23AM +, Dave Williams wrote:
>> >> On 10:35, Wed 24 No
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 09:47:51AM +0100, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Dejan Muhamedagic
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 10:52:23AM +, Dave Williams wrote:
> >> On 10:35, Wed 24 Nov 10, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Nov
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 10:52:23AM +, Dave Williams wrote:
>> On 10:35, Wed 24 Nov 10, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:03:33PM +, Dave Williams wrote:
>> > > Hi,
>> > > I have a probl
> Adding the following patch
>
> --- lrmd.c 2010-11-19 17:51:44.0 +
> +++ ../../../lrmd.c 2010-11-24 20:40:49.351322794 +
> @@ -1104,6 +1104,9 @@
>
> register_pid(FALSE, sigterm_action);
>
> +
> + g_thread_init(NULL);
> +
> /* load RA plugins */
On 16:16, Wed 24 Nov 10, Ante Karamatić wrote:
> U Sri, 24. 11. 2010., u 10:52 +, Dave Williams je napisao/la:
>
> > I currently have a production clustered server down because of this and
> > the fact that ubuntu (I'm advised) have an inconsistently compiled set
> > of HA components. Certaint
On 16:16, Wed 24 Nov 10, Ante Karamatić wrote:
> U Sri, 24. 11. 2010., u 10:52 +, Dave Williams je napisao/la:
>
> > I currently have a production clustered server down because of this and
> > the fact that ubuntu (I'm advised) have an inconsistently compiled set
> > of HA components. Certaint
U Sri, 24. 11. 2010., u 10:52 +, Dave Williams je napisao/la:
> I currently have a production clustered server down because of this and
> the fact that ubuntu (I'm advised) have an inconsistently compiled set
> of HA components. Certaintly both lucid and maverick released packages
> leave defu
On 14:18, Wed 24 Nov 10, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
>
> The most plausible explanation is in this thread:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-ha-dev&m=128765996706209&w=2
>
Thanks for your quick response Dejan,
I understand what the thread says - which is why I posted my findings
on the list. As I said it
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 10:52:23AM +, Dave Williams wrote:
> On 10:35, Wed 24 Nov 10, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:03:33PM +, Dave Williams wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > I have a problem that looks similar to that reported "possible deadlock
> > > in lr
On 10:35, Wed 24 Nov 10, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:03:33PM +, Dave Williams wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I have a problem that looks similar to that reported "possible deadlock
> > in lrmd" on 21st Oct
> >
> > When running lradmin -C to list classes the first time it
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:03:33PM +, Dave Williams wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a problem that looks similar to that reported "possible deadlock
> in lrmd" on 21st Oct
>
> When running lradmin -C to list classes the first time it comes back
> immediately with the expected list e.g.
>
> r...@no
Hi,
I have a problem that looks similar to that reported "possible deadlock
in lrmd" on 21st Oct
When running lradmin -C to list classes the first time it comes back
immediately with the expected list e.g.
r...@node1:/home# lrmadmin -C
There are 5 RA classes supported:
lsb
ocf
stonith
upstart
hea
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 01:20:29PM +0200, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 11:57:56AM +0200, Senko Rasic wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm replying directly to you with this, feel free to forward to the
> > list. For further discussions I could also join the list.
>
> Yes, it woul
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 11:57:56AM +0200, Senko Rasic wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm replying directly to you with this, feel free to forward to the
> list. For further discussions I could also join the list.
Yes, it would be good.
> On 10/21/2010 11:34 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> >Senko Rasic proposed
Hi,
Senko Rasic proposed a patch for the client unregister which
would prevent a double unref of glib sources (IPC channel).
However, I cannot recall any deadlocks in lrmd.
See http://www.init.hr/dev/cluster/patches/2444.diff
Senko, is this something you observed or you just thought it
might occ
21 matches
Mail list logo
