From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 4221E61595 for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 06:54:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2DE1EC46D for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 06:54:50 +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 71B3DC460 for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 06:54:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailpro.odiso.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C119A17B9A5A; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 06:54:40 +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 NxDC4lBBpkWs; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 06:54:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailpro.odiso.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A562817B9A5B; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 06:54:40 +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 uLwP1sAhLkGW; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 06:54:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mailpro.odiso.net (mailpro.odiso.net [10.1.31.111]) by mailpro.odiso.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 907A917B9A5A; Mon, 14 Sep 2020 06:54:40 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2020 06:54:40 +0200 (CEST) From: Alexandre DERUMIER To: Thomas Lamprecht Cc: Proxmox VE development discussion Message-ID: <1928266603.714059.1600059280338.JavaMail.zimbra@odiso.com> In-Reply-To: <9e2974b8-3c39-0fda-6f73-6677e3d796f4@proxmox.com> References: <216436814.339545.1599142316781.JavaMail.zimbra@odiso.com> <1551800621.910.1599540071310@webmail.proxmox.com> <1680829869.439013.1599549082330.JavaMail.zimbra@odiso.com> <761694744.496919.1599713892772.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> 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: CAw03L5u7Jx/7qGQfmTPIEgCsXjyIg== X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.038 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2020 04:54:50 -0000 I wonder if something like pacemaker sbd could be implemented in proxmox as= extra layer of protection ? http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/bionic/man8/sbd.8.html (shared disk heartbeat). Something like a independent daemon (not using corosync/pmxcfs/...), also c= onnected to watchdog muxer. ----- Mail original ----- De: "Thomas Lamprecht" =C3=80: "Proxmox VE development discussion" , = "aderumier" Envoy=C3=A9: Jeudi 10 Septembre 2020 20:21:14 Objet: Re: [pve-devel] corosync bug: cluster break after 1 node clean shutd= own On 10.09.20 13:34, Alexandre DERUMIER wrote:=20 >>> as said, if the other nodes where not using HA, the watchdog-mux had no= =20 >>> client which could expire.=20 >=20 > sorry, maybe I have wrong explained it,=20 > but all my nodes had HA enabled.=20 >=20 > I have double check lrm_status json files from my morning backup 2h befor= e the problem,=20 > they were all in "active" state. ("state":"active","mode":"active" )=20 >=20 OK, so all had a connection to the watchdog-mux open. This shifts the suspi= cion=20 again over to pmxcfs and/or corosync.=20 > I don't why node7 don't have rebooted, the only difference is that is was= the crm master.=20 > (I think crm also reset the watchdog counter ? maybe behaviour is differe= nt than lrm ?)=20 The watchdog-mux stops updating the real watchdog as soon any client discon= nects or times=20 out. It does not know which client (daemon) that was.=20 >>> above lines also indicate very high load.=20 >>> Do you have some monitoring which shows the CPU/IO load before/during t= his event?=20 >=20 > load (1,5,15 ) was: 6 (for 48cores), cpu usage: 23%=20 > no iowait on disk (vms are on a remote ceph, only proxmox services are ru= nning on local ssd disk)=20 >=20 > so nothing strange here :/=20 Hmm, the long loop times could then be the effect of a pmxcfs read or write= =20 operation being (temporarily) stuck.=20