On Thu, September 25, 2008 14:43, Barry Brimer wrote:
Quoting David Dyer-Bennet dd-b@dd-b.net:
On Thu, September 25, 2008 14:13, Barry Brimer wrote:
Is the service itself active?
Do you have a line above these that says something like:
virtual example.com { active = 1
Yes; and it shows as active in Piranha, too, and nannys got started for the three real servers. It just didn't tell ipvs to actually route to them.
What happens when you run the service check by hand?
Don't know what "service check" means (guessing you mean what nanny does to decide a service is working?). But raising the issue of whether something below the level of what I thought I had changed was changed has been somewhat productive.
While I can ping the realservers, turns out I can't access the services on them. Don't know why yet, but that's something I can investigate. (Still don't see why it changed when it did; but if I can't access the services from the lvs, then it can't route to them either, and the nanny checks will fail, etc., so that must be fixed before anything can work.) I will chase this down, and either fix it or have different questions :-). Thank you!
Do you have your IP addresses for different services on different devices
Yes, they're on separate devices, and they're set up the same was as when it worked yesterday, so I don't think it's anything that basic that's wrong.
I think I've been mis-understanding the startup order. Is this what really happens:
1. pulse started
2. lvsd started by pulse
3. nanny for each (active) realserver started by lvsd
4. When a nanny gets a successful test, either it or lvsd *then* enables that realserver for receiving traffic
That would explain why I have nannys running, but no realservers listed by ipvsadm. I expected things to start out on, and only get turned off if the nannys failed; but in fact doing what I listed above makes more sense, it's better if you *have* a nanny to make sure the nanny reports ok *first*.