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)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E522761954 for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 07:46:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D36A916737 for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 07:46:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [212.186.127.180]) (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 firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 63B2716729 for ; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 07:46:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 31DEB44BF1; Tue, 15 Sep 2020 07:46:27 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 07:45:41 +0200 (CEST) From: dietmar To: Alexandre DERUMIER , Thomas Lamprecht Cc: Proxmox VE development discussion Message-ID: <487514223.9.1600148741895@webmail.proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <1775665592.735772.1600098305930.JavaMail.zimbra@odiso.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> <1775665592.735772.1600098305930.JavaMail.zimbra@odiso.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.3-Rev22 X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.090 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_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [network.target, time-sync.target, shutdown.target] 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: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 05:46:58 -0000 > Now, that logging work, I'm also seeeing pmxcfs errors when corosync is stopping. > (But no pmxcfs shutdown log) > > Do you think it's possible to have a clean shutdown of pmxcfs first, before stopping corosync ? This is by intention - we do not want to stop pmxcfs only because coorosync service stops. Unit] Description=The Proxmox VE cluster filesystem ConditionFileIsExecutable=/usr/bin/pmxcfs Wants=corosync.service Wants=rrdcached.service Before=corosync.service Before=ceph.service Before=cron.service After=network.target After=sys-fs-fuse-connections.mount After=time-sync.target After=rrdcached.service DefaultDependencies=no Before=shutdown.target Conflicts=shutdown.target