Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Fabian Arrotin wrote:
[root@c5drbd1 drbd]# pwd ; ls -l /var/lib/drbd total 4 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 14 May 7 20:49 drbd-minor-0.conf -> /etc/drbd.conf
Ralph : nothing listed in the mock/build log about that dir not listed in the %files section ?
Building now.
Ralph
Ok, tested and now ok. I've also seen your mail on the DRBD mailling-list and the Lars' answer about the testing request (http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/2009-May/012019.html). So the question is : do we want to provide both 8.2.7 (as drbd82 package) and 8.3.1 (as drbd83) ? It seems to me that drbd83 is 'just' an update to the 8.2.x branch (it could be named 8.2.10 in the Lars' answer) The reason why there was a drbd (for 7.0.24 on el4 and 8.0.6 on el5) and drbd82 was that metadata was not usable anymore and some config parameters were completely different and so a simple `yum update drbd` could break the existing setup. Now the question seems to be : do you still need to split between drbd82 and drbd83 ?
Fabian Arrotin wrote:
So the question is : do we want to provide both 8.2.7 (as drbd82 package) and 8.3.1 (as drbd83) ? It seems to me that drbd83 is 'just' an update to the 8.2.x branch (it could be named 8.2.10 in the Lars' answer) The reason why there was a drbd (for 7.0.24 on el4 and 8.0.6 on el5) and drbd82 was that metadata was not usable anymore and some config parameters were completely different and so a simple `yum update drbd` could break the existing setup.
No, that was not the reason (at least not for drbd82 on CentOS 5).
http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2795 and especially http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/2008-May/009379.html (Thread URGENT Request for DRBD Developers) on the drbd mailing list, it is split into several threads here: http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/2008-May/thread.html
Now the question seems to be : do you still need to split between drbd82 and drbd83 ?
I don't really care, I also can work with a drbd83 only but I'm sure someone will begin yapping again.
Problem is: The current git version does not build for me (I just gave it one shot, no debugging yet), I might try the git tag SuSE pulled out for SLES11.
Ralph
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Fabian Arrotin wrote:
So the question is : do we want to provide both 8.2.7 (as drbd82 package) and 8.3.1 (as drbd83) ? It seems to me that drbd83 is 'just' an update to the 8.2.x branch (it could be named 8.2.10 in the Lars' answer) The reason why there was a drbd (for 7.0.24 on el4 and 8.0.6 on el5) and drbd82 was that metadata was not usable anymore and some config parameters were completely different and so a simple `yum update drbd` could break the existing setup.
No, that was not the reason (at least not for drbd82 on CentOS 5).
http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2795 and especially http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/2008-May/009379.html (Thread URGENT Request for DRBD Developers) on the drbd mailing list, it is split into several threads here: http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/2008-May/thread.html
Problem is: The current git version does not build for me (I just gave it one shot, no debugging yet), I might try the git tag SuSE pulled out for SLES11.
Okay, that is the reason why I now rebuilt git HEAD for version 8.2.7 - after Lars said it was okay to do so (and after him telling me how to compile).
The versions now in testing:
drbd-8.0.16-4 (EL 5 only) drbd82-8.2.7.git_20090512-1 (EL 4 is at -2 due to a missing backup) drbd83-8.3.1-3
kmod-drbd-8.0.16-4 (and subpackages for kernel versions) kmod-drbd82-8.2.7.git_20090512-1 (again, EL 4 is at -2) kmod-drbd83-8.3.1-4
I've tested the CentOS 5 versions and they are working fine (even with 8.0 on one side, 8.3.1 on the other), if someone again - or still - wants to test for EL4, please do so. The drbd stuff is supposed to work, it's more the packaging on EL4 which should be tested.
I'd like to move these packages into CentOS extras soon.
Cheers,
Ralph
Fabian Arrotin wrote:
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
Building now.
Ok, tested and now ok. I've also seen your mail on the DRBD mailling-list and the Lars' answer about the testing request (http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/2009-May/012019.html). So the question is : do we want to provide both 8.2.7 (as drbd82 package) and 8.3.1 (as drbd83) ? It seems to me that drbd83 is 'just' an update to the 8.2.x branch (it could be named 8.2.10 in the Lars' answer)
Okay, did some tests on a heartbeat cluster.
At the moment I am running
[root@on3-temp1 ~]# head -1 /proc/drbd version: 8.3.1 (api:88/proto:86-89)
on one side of the cluster,
[root@on3-temp2 mnt]# head -1 /proc/drbd version: 8.0.16 (api:86/proto:86)
on the other side of the cluster withour problems (well, some advanced setup options are turned off, as 8.0 does not know about them.
Upgrading through the three versions was painless, failovers also work without problems between those two versions.
I haven't done any real stress tests, but the systems seem to work (I've bzip2d and bunzip2d for about an hour on each on node and then upgraded to the next drbd version, md5sums are still okay after that).
All tests on CentOS 5, I didn't have time for any tests on CentOS 4.
Ralph
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
I haven't done any real stress tests, but the systems seem to work (I've bzip2d and bunzip2d for about an hour on each on node and then upgraded to the next drbd version, md5sums are still okay after that).
All tests on CentOS 5, I didn't have time for any tests on CentOS 4.
As I haven't heard back anything negative about the packages by either Kevin Fenzi nor by Fabian and the packages do install on CentOS4 and are usable (very preliminary testing done by me), I'd like to push those to the extras repository next week.
Anything which would speak against that?
Ralph
-
Fabian Arrotin -
Ralph Angenendt