On 04/07/2011 12:45 PM, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
> 05.04.2011 19:34, Steven Dake wrote:
>> On 04/05/2011 09:53 AM, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
>>> 05.04.2011 19:41, Steven Dake wrote:
This could be one of two things. Either a bug in the lock service
around reference counting, or a known i
05.04.2011 19:34, Steven Dake wrote:
> On 04/05/2011 09:53 AM, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
>> 05.04.2011 19:41, Steven Dake wrote:
>>> This could be one of two things. Either a bug in the lock service
>>> around reference counting, or a known issue we have resolved with
>>> recursion that causes sta
On 04/05/2011 09:53 AM, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
> 05.04.2011 19:41, Steven Dake wrote:
>> This could be one of two things. Either a bug in the lock service
>> around reference counting, or a known issue we have resolved with
>> recursion that causes stack corrution.
>>
>> We will release a new v
05.04.2011 19:41, Steven Dake wrote:
> This could be one of two things. Either a bug in the lock service
> around reference counting, or a known issue we have resolved with
> recursion that causes stack corrution.
>
> We will release a new version of 1.3 in the next week or so.
Does this mean th
On 04/05/2011 07:33 AM, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> just got a segfault in pthread_mutex_lock() called from
> ipc_thread_active:471.
>
> This happened at least five times in a row on one cluster node, which
> then was fenced each time. Restart of whole cluster helped.
>
> corosync 1.3.0
