Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 21:40:05 +0100 From: Christian Vogt <Christian.Vogt@haw-hamburg.de> To: Mikolaj Golub <to.my.trociny@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: hastd Failover with ucarp Message-ID: <8B15C618-4560-4ABE-BD8E-94872A33F5F6@haw-hamburg.de> In-Reply-To: <86ei713vny.fsf@kopusha.home.net> References: <2C4EE30F-7731-4B84-ADC6-75C0266863F0@haw-hamburg.de> <86ei713vny.fsf@kopusha.home.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>=20 > On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 16:55:35 +0100 Christian Vogt wrote: >=20 > CV> Hello!=20 >=20 > CV> Thanks for the great work, I like this straight-forward FreeBSD a = lot > CV> from what I experienced untill now. I used the HAST How-To from > CV> http://wiki.freebsd.org/HAST and it works perfectly if I use = "pkill -USR2 > CV> -f 'ucarp -B'" to initiate the failover. The secondary node = becomes > CV> primary and the carp-interface is switched over to it. >=20 > CV> But if I do a hard shutdown of the primary node it doesn't work, = the > CV> secondary node doesn't get primary. The ucarp-up script on the = secondary > CV> node is executed, but it fails because of the still running = secondary > CV> worker process (Secondary process for resource test is still = running > CV> after 30 seconds). Is the secondary process expected to end > CV> automatically, when the primary process fails? >=20 > I think it should exit but currently it does not. In r207371 timeouts = for > primary incoming and outgoing and secondary outgoing were added but = not for > secondary incoming. After keep alive mechanism was implemented I think = we can > add timeout for secondary incoming too. E.g. like in the attached = patch? >=20 > With the patch the secondary will exit in 20 seconds if it does not = receive > any packets from the primary. >=20 > Or may by it is better to replace RETRY_SLEEP with timeout = configuration > parameter, both for keep alive/reconnection interval in primary and = secondary > incoming timeout? >=20 > --=20 > Mikolaj Golub >=20 > <hastd.secondary_incoming_timeout.patch> Thanks for your help, this solved the issue! I'm still going to use the = carp+devd variant as proposed by Freddie, but this seems to be a good = failover if carp doesn't work properly. Christian Vogt=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8B15C618-4560-4ABE-BD8E-94872A33F5F6>