similar to: a question about tdb record backup for ctdb failover

sun yekuan via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> writes: > OK, thank you! I have another question: > > what the current CTDB have done for transparent failover ? achieved fully or partially? > if CTDB has not achieved fully, what else we should do ? Fully transparent failover not only a ctdb task. Samba is involved too. We need persistent file handles with guarantees, a task

sun yekuan <sunyekuan at outlook.com> writes: > ok, thank you! > > Except witness, what else should CTDB do for supportting transparent > failover? ctdb needs to develop a database model to distribute persistent handle information across nodes. For larger clusters, this will probably also require to introduce failover groups, you don't want to broadcast persistent handle

OK, thank you! I have another question: what the current CTDB have done for transparent failover ? achieved fully or partially? if CTDB has not achieved fully, what else we should do ? thank you! best wishes! From: Amitay Isaacs<mailto:amitay at gmail.com> Date: 2016-10-11 13:43 To: sun yekuan<mailto:sunyekuan at outlook.com> Subject: Re: Re: [Samba] a question about tdb record

Greetings list, I was looking at the wiki "samba and clustering" and a ctdb.pdf, admittedly both are quite old (2006 or 2007) and I don't know how things change over years, but I just have two questions about LMASTER: < this is from pdf > LMASTER fixed ? LMASTER is based on record key only ? LMASTER knows where the record is stored ? new records are stored on LMASTER Q1.

Hi guys, I try to set up two identical installed up to date CentOS6 machines with Glusterfs/CTDB/Samba . I have set up Glusterfs and it works. I have set up CTDB from CentOS and it seems to work too. Samba is AD integrated and works mainly. The main problem is that file locking seem to not work between the machines at all. If two Win7 clients try to open an document from the same Samba server

This is long overdue CTDB release. There have been numerous code enhancements and bug fixes since the last release of CTDB. Highlights ======= * Support for readonly records (http://ctdb.samba.org/doc/readonlyrecords.txt) * Locking API to detect deadlocks between ctdb and samba * Fetch-lock optimization to rate-limit concurrent requests for same record * Support for policy routing * Modified IP

rdiscount-1.3.1.1 is uninstallable on solaris --------------------------------------------------------- root@dcb0:/opt/gitorious# gem install rdiscount -v 1.3.1.1 Building native extensions. This could take a while... ERROR: Error installing rdiscount: ERROR: Failed to build gem native extension. /opt/ruby/bin/ruby extconf.rb checking for random()... yes checking for srandom()... yes

Hi list We recently upgraded our fileservers from Centos supplied 4.2.10 to Sernet 4.4.6, and then our DCs from 3.6.x to 4.4.6. It seems that since then we've had problems with locks not being obeyed on all nodes - they only seem to work when a second client opens a file on the same node as the first client. For example, when a user opens an Excel file I will see something like this

On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Alex Crow via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > Hi list > > We recently upgraded our fileservers from Centos supplied 4.2.10 to Sernet > 4.4.6, and then our DCs from 3.6.x to 4.4.6. > > It seems that since then we've had problems with locks not being obeyed on > all nodes - they only seem to work when a second client opens a

Running into problems configuring different locations for the volatile and other database directories. Can someone provide a quick sanity check on what I'm doing below? Thank you. Given [database] volatile database directory = /var/cache/dbdir/volatile persistent database directory = /var/cache/dbdir/persistent state database directory = /var/cache/dbdir/state And given, [root

Hi, I am testing CTDB failover cases. For one of my test case I need to bring one of the nodes to partially online state . Looking for help with the configuration that needs to be done to reach to this state. Thanks, Surabhi NOTE: I am testing CTDB2.5 version

Hi! > Removing htons() from both calls seems to fix the issue for us. Is it > possible that the call to htons is just wrong and should be removed? [...] > Thanks for reporting the issue.  Yes, htons() in socket() call is wrong > and should be removed. > > Can you create a bug report on [3]bugzilla.samba.org against CTDB? Done. See

This is the latest stable release of CTDB. CTDB 2.5.4 can be used with Samba releases 3.6.x, 4.0.x and 4.1.x. Changes in CTDB 2.5.4 ===================== User-visible changes -------------------- * New command "ctdb detach" to detach a database. * Support for TDB robust mutexes. To enable set TDBMutexEnabled=1. The setting is per node. * New manual page ctdb-statistics.7.

Hi! A recent kernel security update[1] caused some issues with our ctdb cluster; messages like: | We are still serving a public IP 'x.x.x.x' that we should not be serving. Removing it | common/system_common.c:89 failed to open raw socket (Invalid argument) | Could not find which interface the ip address is hosted on. can not release it and | common/system_linux.c:344 failed to

Hi Bob, [CC: Amitay, who is better at SeLinux] On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 09:33:10 -0500, Robert Buck via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > This turns out to be an SELinux issue. Does anyone know the proper commands > to restorecon or otherwise to set the SELinux policy for > persistent/volatile database files moved to a different directory? I'm not sure if you're asking

Hi Bob, On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 20:56:39 -0400, Robert Buck <robert.buck at som.com> wrote: > Hi Martin, you seem to do a lot of work on CTDB. Let me ask a question... Yes, I have done a lot of work on CTDB. A bit less lately... > Is there a way to segment CTDB/Samba to minimize chatter? Specifically, > what I have in mind... In recent years advances have been made in >

Hi Bob, On Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:09:34 +1100, Martin Schwenke via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > On Sun, 25 Oct 2020 20:44:07 -0400, Robert Buck <robert.buck at som.com> > wrote: > > > We use a Golang-based lock tool that we wrote for CTDB. That tool interacts > > with our 3.4 etcd cluster, and follows the requirements specified in the > >

Can anyone help with some pointers to debug a problem with Samba and CTDB with smbstatus traversing the connections tdb? I've got a new two node cluster with Samba and CTDB on AIX. If I run smbstatus when the server has much user activity it hangs and the node it was run on gets banned. I see the following in the ctdb log: 2014/10/29 11:12:45.374580 [3932342]:

Hi All, We're using CTDB to cluster protocols over a large SAN and have had some pain related to a bit of a design flaw: we store CTDB and protocol-specific accounting files (recovery locks, state files, etc) on the same filesystem that we're offering through CTDB itself. This makes our front-end services pretty intolerant of flapping in the back-end filesystem, which is obviously not

Hi folks I face a problem about the data synchronization when using the ctdb. When one ctdb node fails, other ctdb nodes may not recover the data of the failed node. I think it may be due to the fact that ctdb stores its tdb files in the local storage. So, is it fine to store the tdb files in the shared directory of the backend storage? When one node fails, other nodes may recover the data from