>>> Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com> schrieb am 27.06.2018 um 16:18 in >>> Nachricht <1530109097.6452.1.ca...@redhat.com>: > On Wed, 2018-06-27 at 07:41 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote: >> > > > Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com> schrieb am 26.06.2018 um >> > > > 18:22 in Nachricht >> >> <1530030128.5202.5.ca...@redhat.com>: >> > On Tue, 2018-06-26 at 10:45 +0300, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote: >> > > 26.06.2018 09:14, Ulrich Windl wrote: >> > > > Hi! >> > > > >> > > > We just observed some strange effect we cannot explain in SLES >> > > > 11 >> > > > SP4 (pacemaker 1.1.12-f47ea56): >> > > > We run about a dozen of Xen PVMs on a three-node cluster (plus >> > > > some >> > > > infrastructure and monitoring stuff). It worked all well so >> > > > far, >> > > > and there was no significant change recently. >> > > > However when a colleague stopped on VM for maintenance via >> > > > cluster >> > > > command, the cluster did not notice when the PVM actually was >> > > > running again (it had been started not using the cluster (a bad >> > > > idea, I know)). >> > > >> > > To be on a safe side in such cases you'd probably want to enable >> > > additional monitor for a "Stopped" role. Default one covers only >> > > "Started" role. The same thing as for multistate resources, where >> > > you >> > > need several monitor ops, for "Started/Slave" and "Master" roles. >> > > But, this will increase a load. >> > > And, I believe cluster should reprobe a resource on all nodes >> > > once >> > > you >> > > change target-role back to "Started". >> > >> > Which raises the question, how did you stop the VM initially? >> >> I thought "(...) stopped one VM for maintenance via cluster command" >> is obvious. It was something like "crm resource stop ...". >> >> > >> > If you stopped it by setting target-role to Stopped, likely the >> > cluster >> > still thinks it's stopped, and you need to set it to Started again. >> > If >> > instead you set maintenance mode or unmanaged the resource, then >> > stopped the VM manually, then most likely it's still in that mode >> > and >> > needs to be taken out of it. >> >> The point was when the command to start the resource was given, the >> cluster had completely ignored the fact that it was running already >> and started to start the VM on a second node (which may be >> desastrous). But that's leading away from the main question... > > Ah, this is expected behavior when you start a resource manually, and > there are no monitors with target-role=Stopped. If the node where you > manually started the VM isn't the same node the cluster happens to > choose, then you can get multiple active instances. > > By default, the cluster assumes that where a probe found a resource to > be not running, that resource will stay not running unless started by > the cluster. (It will re-probe if the node goes away and comes back.)
But didn't this behavior change? I tohought it was different maybe a year ago or so. > > If you wish to guard against resources being started outside cluster > control, configure a recurring monitor with target-role=Stopped, and > the cluster will run that on all nodes where it thinks the resource is > not supposed to be running. Of course since it has to poll at > intervals, it can take up to that much time to detect a manually > started instance. Did monitor roles exist always, or were those added some time ago? > >> > > > Examining the logs, it seems that the recheck timer popped >> > > > periodically, but no monitor action was run for the VM (the >> > > > action >> > > > is configured to run every 10 minutes). > > Recurring monitors are only recorded in the log if their return value > changed. If there are 10 successful monitors in a row and then a > failure, only the first success and the failure are logged. OK, din't know that. Thanks a lot for the explanations! Regards, Ulrich > >> > > > >> > > > Actually the only monitor operations found were: >> > > > May 23 08:04:13 >> > > > Jun 13 08:13:03 >> > > > Jun 25 09:29:04 >> > > > Then a manual "reprobe" was done, and several monitor >> > > > operations >> > > > were run. >> > > > Then again I see no more monitor actions in syslog. >> > > > >> > > > What could be the reasons for this? Too many operations >> > > > defined? >> > > > >> > > > The other message I don't understand is like "<other-resource>: >> > > > Rolling back scores from <vm-resource>" >> > > > >> > > > Could it be a new bug introduced in pacemaker, or could it be >> > > > some >> > > > configuration problem (The status is completely clean however)? >> > > > >> > > > According to the packet changelog, there was no change since >> > > > Nov >> > > > 2016... >> > > > >> > > > Regards, >> > > > Ulrich > -- > Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com> > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org > https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf > Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org _______________________________________________ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org