From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBD631FF141 for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2026 11:12:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E12F835115; Fri, 13 Feb 2026 11:13:33 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <3d5c2533-3270-4c8d-b4d2-a774cd2fc46c@proxmox.com> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2026 11:12:58 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH pve-docs 1/1] pvecm: config: document how to change the token coefficient From: Friedrich Weber To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260212115928.148999-1-f.weber@proxmox.com> <20260212115928.148999-4-f.weber@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <20260212115928.148999-4-f.weber@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1770977575580 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.013 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: DYAUU5V64OTM5YRS5UKQZ2B5CP3Q2S7Q X-Message-ID-Hash: DYAUU5V64OTM5YRS5UKQZ2B5CP3Q2S7Q X-MailFrom: f.weber@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 12/02/2026 12:59, Friedrich Weber wrote: > New clusters are created with a lower coefficient. Users with existing > clusters or users who prefer a different token coefficient may want to > change the token coefficient. Hence, add a note how to change the > token coefficient to the admin guide. > > Signed-off-by: Friedrich Weber > --- > > Notes: > - should this already include more details (in which cases changing > the coefficient may be necessary?) in this first version? > > - currently, changing the token_coefficient in /etc/pve/corosync.conf > without a corosync restart updates token and consensus timeouts, but > knet_ping_timeout and knet_ping_interval are not updated, this is > the reason why the patch suggests a corosync restart. I filed a bug > for this [1] and there is a promising pull request [2] that appears > to fix the issue. So the question is whether we want to backport [2] > (when it's merged), and if yes, whether we want to remove the > restart suggestion from the docs. > > [1] https://github.com/corosync/corosync/issues/813 > [2] https://github.com/corosync/corosync/pull/814 The PR was already merged, I sent a cherry-pick: https://lore.proxmox.com/pve-devel/20260213101121.107073-1-f.weber@proxmox.com/T/