From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <aderumier@odiso.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B62CF6183B for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 17:45:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A810512509 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 17:45:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mailpro.odiso.net (mailpro.odiso.net [89.248.211.110]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id D3ABA124FC for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 17:45:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailpro.odiso.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60BEF17BFBB1; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 17:45:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mailpro.odiso.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mailpro.odiso.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id KCs22xTE0bMm; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 17:45:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailpro.odiso.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44CA217BFBB8; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 17:45:06 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mailpro.odiso.com Received: from mailpro.odiso.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mailpro.odiso.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 8zpIlodgbJMz; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 17:45:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mailpro.odiso.net (mailpro.odiso.net [10.1.31.111]) by mailpro.odiso.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A3B117BFBB1; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 17:45:06 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2020 17:45:05 +0200 (CEST) From: Alexandre DERUMIER <aderumier@odiso.com> To: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> Cc: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, dietmar <dietmar@proxmox.com> Message-ID: <1775665592.735772.1600098305930.JavaMail.zimbra@odiso.com> In-Reply-To: <88fe5075-870d-9197-7c84-71ae8a25e9dd@proxmox.com> References: <216436814.339545.1599142316781.JavaMail.zimbra@odiso.com> <3ee5d9cf-19be-1067-3931-1c54f1c6043a@proxmox.com> <1245358354.508169.1599737684557.JavaMail.zimbra@odiso.com> <9e2974b8-3c39-0fda-6f73-6677e3d796f4@proxmox.com> <1928266603.714059.1600059280338.JavaMail.zimbra@odiso.com> <803983196.1499.1600067690947@webmail.proxmox.com> <2093781647.723563.1600072074707.JavaMail.zimbra@odiso.com> <88fe5075-870d-9197-7c84-71ae8a25e9dd@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.8.12_GA_3866 (ZimbraWebClient - GC83 (Linux)/8.8.12_GA_3844) Thread-Topic: corosync bug: cluster break after 1 node clean shutdown Thread-Index: Sne6bbvfuCLM2Bp5iG39LUqWfcqWfQ== X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.036 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE -0.0001 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, no trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] corosync bug: cluster break after 1 node clean shutdown X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2020 15:45:09 -0000 >>Did you get in contact with knet/corosync devs about this?=20 >>Because, it may well be something their stack is better at handling it, m= aybe=20 >>there's also really still a bug, or bad behaviour on some edge cases...= =20 not yet, I would like to have more infos to submit, because I'm blind. I have enabled debug logs on all my cluster if that happen again. BTW, I have noticed something,=20 corosync is stopped after syslog stop, so at shutdown we never have corosyn= c log I have edit corosync.service - After=3Dnetwork-online.target + After=3Dnetwork-online.target syslog.target and now It's logging correctly. Now, that logging work, I'm also seeeing pmxcfs errors when corosync is sto= pping. (But no pmxcfs shutdown log) Do you think it's possible to have a clean shutdown of pmxcfs first, before= stopping corosync ? " Sep 14 17:23:49 pve corosync[1346]: [MAIN ] Node was shut down by a sign= al Sep 14 17:23:49 pve systemd[1]: Stopping Corosync Cluster Engine... Sep 14 17:23:49 pve corosync[1346]: [SERV ] Unloading all Corosync servi= ce engines. Sep 14 17:23:49 pve corosync[1346]: [QB ] withdrawing server sockets Sep 14 17:23:49 pve corosync[1346]: [SERV ] Service engine unloaded: cor= osync vote quorum service v1.0 Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [confdb] crit: cmap_dispatch failed: 2 Sep 14 17:23:49 pve corosync[1346]: [QB ] withdrawing server sockets Sep 14 17:23:49 pve corosync[1346]: [SERV ] Service engine unloaded: cor= osync configuration map access Sep 14 17:23:49 pve corosync[1346]: [QB ] withdrawing server sockets Sep 14 17:23:49 pve corosync[1346]: [SERV ] Service engine unloaded: cor= osync configuration service Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [status] crit: cpg_dispatch failed: 2 Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [status] crit: cpg_leave failed: 2 Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [dcdb] crit: cpg_dispatch failed: 2 Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [dcdb] crit: cpg_leave failed: 2 Sep 14 17:23:49 pve corosync[1346]: [QB ] withdrawing server sockets Sep 14 17:23:49 pve corosync[1346]: [SERV ] Service engine unloaded: cor= osync cluster quorum service v0.1 Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [quorum] crit: quorum_dispatch failed: 2 Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [status] notice: node lost quorum Sep 14 17:23:49 pve corosync[1346]: [SERV ] Service engine unloaded: cor= osync profile loading service Sep 14 17:23:49 pve corosync[1346]: [SERV ] Service engine unloaded: cor= osync resource monitoring service Sep 14 17:23:49 pve corosync[1346]: [SERV ] Service engine unloaded: cor= osync watchdog service Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [quorum] crit: quorum_initialize failed: = 2 Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [quorum] crit: can't initialize service Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [confdb] crit: cmap_initialize failed: 2 Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [confdb] crit: can't initialize service Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [dcdb] notice: start cluster connection Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [dcdb] crit: cpg_initialize failed: 2 Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [dcdb] crit: can't initialize service Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [status] notice: start cluster connection Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [status] crit: cpg_initialize failed: 2 Sep 14 17:23:49 pve pmxcfs[1132]: [status] crit: can't initialize service Sep 14 17:23:50 pve corosync[1346]: [MAIN ] Corosync Cluster Engine exit= ing normally " ----- Mail original ----- De: "Thomas Lamprecht" <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com> =C3=80: "Proxmox VE development discussion" <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, = "aderumier" <aderumier@odiso.com>, "dietmar" <dietmar@proxmox.com> Envoy=C3=A9: Lundi 14 Septembre 2020 10:51:03 Objet: Re: [pve-devel] corosync bug: cluster break after 1 node clean shutd= own On 9/14/20 10:27 AM, Alexandre DERUMIER wrote:=20 >> I wonder if something like pacemaker sbd could be implemented in proxmox= as extra layer of protection ?=20 >=20 >>> AFAIK Thomas already has patches to implement active fencing.=20 >=20 >>> But IMHO this will not solve the corosync problems..=20 >=20 > Yes, sure. I'm really to have to 2 differents sources of verification, wi= th different path/software, to avoid this kind of bug.=20 > (shit happens, murphy law ;)=20 would then need at least three, and if one has a bug flooding the network i= n=20 a lot of setups (not having beefy switches like you ;) the other two will b= e=20 taken down also, either as memory or the system stack gets overloaded.=20 >=20 > as we say in French "ceinture & bretelles" -> "belt and braces"=20 >=20 >=20 > BTW,=20 > a user have reported new corosync problem here:=20 > https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/proxmox-6-2-corosync-3-rare-and-spontan= eous-disruptive-udp-5405-storm-flood.75871=20 > (Sound like the bug that I have 6month ago, with corosync bug flooding a = lof of udp packets, but not the same bug I have here)=20 Did you get in contact with knet/corosync devs about this?=20 Because, it may well be something their stack is better at handling it, may= be=20 there's also really still a bug, or bad behaviour on some edge cases...=20