>>> Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com> schrieb am 18.01.2021 um 19:29 in Nachricht <1047fd943be77f4a6fd4cd4dd19b65d1550512f8.ca...@redhat.com>: > On Fri, 2021‑01‑15 at 11:40 +0100, Ulrich Windl wrote: >> Hi! >> >> With a cluster recheck interval, I see periodic log messages like >> this: >> Jan 15 11:05:50 h19 pacemaker‑controld[4804]: notice: State >> transition S_TRANSITION_ENGINE ‑> S_IDLE >> Jan 15 11:15:50 h19 pacemaker‑controld[4804]: notice: State >> transition S_IDLE ‑> S_POLICY_ENGINE > > The "transition" terminology is a little confusing. Note that the above > uses of it are just in the normal sense, i.e. the controller state > changed. > > The controller uses a finite state machine to keep track of what it's > doing now and next. Going from "transition engine" to "idle" means it > finished whatever needed to be done in that transition (in the more > technical Pacemaker sense). Going from "idle" to "police engine" means > it is ready to re‑invoke the scheduler to re‑check whether anything > needs to be done. > >> Jan 15 11:15:50 h19 pacemaker‑schedulerd[4803]: notice: Watchdog >> will be used via SBD if fencing is required and stonith‑watchdog‑ >> timeout is nonzero >> Jan 15 11:15:50 h19 pacemaker‑schedulerd[4803]: notice: Calculated >> transition 596, saving inputs in /var/lib/pacemaker/pengine/pe‑input‑ >> 41.bz2 >> Jan 15 11:15:50 h19 pacemaker‑controld[4804]: notice: Processing >> graph 596 (ref=pe_calc‑dc‑1610705750‑978) derived from >> /var/lib/pacemaker/pengine/pe‑input‑41.bz2 >> Jan 15 11:15:50 h19 pacemaker‑controld[4804]: notice: Transition 596 >> (Complete=3, Pending=0, Fired=0, Skipped=0, Incomplete=0, >> Source=/var/lib/pacemaker/pengine/pe‑input‑41.bz2): Complete >> >> The "transition" number increases each time, while there is visible >> no action to be performed. So what's in such a "transition"? Couldn't >> the cluster skip those lines if there's nothing to do? >> >> Regards, >> Ulrich > > "Transition" as Pacemaker uses it in a technical sense is what you > called in a different post an "action plan". A transition is all > actions needed to bring the cluster to the desired state (as defined by > the configuration), given everything known about the cluster at the > moment (represented by the complete CIB including configuration and > status). > > The controller starts a new transition whenever something interesting > happens (like a resource monitor failure), when a transition action > returns an unexpected result (like a start failing instead of > succeeding), and periodically (according to cluster‑recheck‑interval). > > In any case, it's possible there's nothing to do, so the transition has > no actions. It's still a record that the cluster checked whether > anything needed to be done, and decided no. I have considered lowering > the log message to info level in that case, though ‑‑ that probably > makes sense.
If its something that is expected to happen frequently under normal conditions, I also think "info" instead of "notice" would be OK as well, but what about pe-input? Is a new file required even if there's nothing to do? I could imagine reusing the last number if the last transition had no actions other than monitor/probe. Of course that would not work if inputs are interleaved (the next begins before the last one has finished). Regards, Ulrich > ‑‑ > Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com> > > _______________________________________________ > Manage your subscription: > https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ _______________________________________________ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/