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 D38D966812 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 11:46:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C1A562A1BD for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 11:45:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-wr1-x42c.google.com (mail-wr1-x42c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 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 37B232A1AE for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 11:45:43 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wr1-x42c.google.com with SMTP id m5so8511545wrx.9 for ; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 02:45:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=reply-to:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=aFmKzVqVMo8vf5zk2ZgbNXKWutSJ1ErVnWBPFVUDktA=; b=drrtBdcWLIV9793siOV8LufjMTE0Y4otbE04RzGFNz9Nc1NRXqdhd09kwbaiXk+uiC sDgpFV2BeJGJ7UKdj2mxDie6/7725UGMgRk3NeiG/ez6MCxqfgkS2IIXah/7Kr/xR9/x FxAEIBkRBjnYjCKnDNEAtG/sTUdeeHNoN4Czx01VM9y20LafBjqpUXwTW1LJsyvJwB9J WG/QJoVA/rlOSJ69TIsoeiqHs2hKkCBIl4mvl09XeoCIKOE/IxKpYf12JNsVo8fxN90o 4d2vRmVzOkJnP8R7EuLwJgvg9rxCsjQr1rzpeXs8QoL37BR8gGQydkzLEZOCbmLl3NOM QF3g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:reply-to:subject:to:references:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=aFmKzVqVMo8vf5zk2ZgbNXKWutSJ1ErVnWBPFVUDktA=; b=F1mez6TP/SCkJY1iq9NkaDNotuWGKAJA6F6XuIeUIiy5jdop6z80JKUB0cBj9IBwxg MikzNwDZ3jxKJsbQlndX1WigMOxTmQWKryTSqA7JiIzXVOg8LzolYXOi3TYpPl1RbAup jOBJJj8OlcmsYH5U4qKo4Om7dvPkkHOizRWKdqMLu6nhMeMvN4DDZN8ajt/YDWkLcb6k pQb24vmBBu2eF3CB3uveWGsHvHMp4TZ0WxKtxP7vl6T6Gecf/6RtyfUZqo3fEkbsS+vp eluq27MygQgLtkuzGBAtuxgRPPdqQ8Y4EXM1acD5Cbw0areSiIUFCNNCH4wL6qRVN+bI fPQQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530mWmS4cva/c690+nlcLvovlWl/pH2bTHgJB327C+ddURRMjCUD PCtMenb7hTW2UwTCY4S9+94tM+kagfo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyHV3gmzdv/L9+Th6dl/gwlMkQnevGoiHnRs7FL+QBkVJ53QBCeEa1P1lYwyRS2ZXAYF1kgPw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:85:: with SMTP id m5mr2972700wrx.378.1610102736928; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 02:45:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2a02:8070:a3c0:1400:af10:bae:a0a4:33b7? ([2a02:8070:a3c0:1400:af10:bae:a0a4:33b7]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id u5sm12360370wrr.32.2021.01.08.02.45.36 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 08 Jan 2021 02:45:36 -0800 (PST) Reply-To: uwe.sauter.de@gmail.com To: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com References: <21dec802-c6e8-d395-1444-7b30df5620cd@dkfz-heidelberg.de> <255b8af8-8834-0f24-d9a6-819f2d2cf8c8@dkfz-heidelberg.de> <9811d98a-ebf2-8590-ddd0-3b707ede4a4e@dkfz-heidelberg.de> <89a1ad57-6f99-d422-08df-d110f10aa3b9@dkfz-heidelberg.de> <4bdfeb73-582e-2c25-e300-166283e40dc5@dkfz-heidelberg.de> From: Uwe Sauter Message-ID: Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2021 11:45:35 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4bdfeb73-582e-2c25-e300-166283e40dc5@dkfz-heidelberg.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: de-DE Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.200 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain FREEMAIL_FROM 0.001 Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider NICE_REPLY_A -0.267 Looks like a legit reply (A) 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 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [proxmox.com, ceph.com] Subject: Re: [PVE-User] After update Ceph monitor shows wrong version in UI and is down and out of quorum X-BeenThere: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE user list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2021 10:46:14 -0000 Am 08.01.21 um 11:36 schrieb Frank Thommen: > > On 05.01.21 21:17, Frank Thommen wrote: >> On 05.01.21 21:02, Uwe Sauter wrote: >>> There's a paragraph about probing mons on >>> >>> https://docs.ceph.com/en/latest/rados/troubleshooting/troubleshooting-mon/ >> >> I will check that (tomorrow :-) > > > using the monitor's admin socket on either of the three nodes I can query the monitors of 01 and 03 (the good ones) but > not of 02 (the problematic one): > > root@odcf-pve01:~# ceph tell mon.odcf-pve02 mon_status > Error ENOENT: problem getting command descriptions from mon.odcf-pve02 > root@odcf-pve01:~# > > The monitor daemon is running on all three and the ports are open. > > Any other ideas? You could check the permissions on the socket: ss -xln | grep ceph-mon SOCK=$(ss -xln | awk '/ceph-mon/ {print $5}') ls -la ${SOCK} On my host, this shows srwxr-xr-x 1 ceph ceph 0 Dec 20 23:47 /var/run/ceph/ceph-mon.px-alpha-cluster.asok > > Cheers, Frank > > _______________________________________________ > pve-user mailing list > pve-user@lists.proxmox.com > https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user >