IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
Autobuild-User(master): Martin Schwenke <martins@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Thu Aug 18 02:50:16 CEST 2016 on sn-devel-144
This is inconsistent with the rest of the local IP verification. It
should notice problems but not try to fix them directly. Like other
cases, it should use an IP takeover run to try to fix the problem. In
this case the address might have just been added and an out-of-band
RELEASE_IP might cause conflicts (i.e. "another change is in flight")
with a scheduled IP takeover run.
This effectively reverts commit
694c1b269e. Not sure why this was
needed after c7e648c2d1. More recently
commit 6471541d6d moves responsibility
for determining interface/netmask to 10.interface so this should
continue to work just fine.
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
Cause an "updateip" instead of just logging a message.
This may reset existing connections. However, CTDB doesn't think the
address should already be hosted on the node so there should be no
connections.
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
This doesn't currently happen but it will in a subsequent commit.
That commit and this one could be squashed but then the functional
change gets lost in amongst this one.
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
This reverts commit 4136f27145.
If the IP address is on an interface then it won't help to pretend
that it isn't. This will simply cause a takeip event, which will fail
because the address can't be added. Note that the IP address isn't
necessarily new - something unexpected may have happened.
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
The address may already be assigned to another node, so this is wrong.
It also leaves the interface unknown.
This is better left to code that handles rogue IP addresses. A
takeover run should correctly takeover the address if it is assigned
to this node or release it if it is assigned to another node. Coming
soon...
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
This has the advantage of using common code. Also, if there was
previously a failed attempt to release the IP address as part of a
delete, then this will finish processing the delete.
Extra care needs to be taken when a VNN is actually deleted.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12158
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
This contains the cleanup that needs to be done after an IP address is
released from an interface.
state->vnn is set to the return value from release_ip_post(), which is
either the original VNN, or NULL if it was deleted. This allows
correct handling of the in-flight flag in the destructor for state.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12158
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
If there's an allocation failure then the implicit early return in
CTDB_NO_MEMORY_VOID() means that no reply is sent to the control.
ctdb_daemon_send_message() makes a copy of the data, so don't copy it
here and remove an unnecessary chance of failure.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12158
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
If RELEASE_IP fails then updating the VNN makes it inconsistent with
reality. Instead, log the failure and move on to the next IP
address.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12158
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
The "releaseip" event in 10.interface will determine the interface and
do the right thing.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12158
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12157
In the AIX case, also add the close of the file.
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12157
CID 1364703: Resource leak (RESOURCE_LEAK)
However, this would already be fixed by the fix for CID 1125618, so
this is probably just a minor bug fix.
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
Drop setting socket non-blocking and close-on-exec. The socket is
closed soon after. Only a single packet is sent, making it almost
impossible for it to block. Also, note that sockets aren't setup this
way for IPv6.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12157
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
This way the test doesn't need to be changed every time the code is
moved around.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12157
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
Interfaces going up or down are always interesting, so log these at
error level.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12157
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
This is related to an error, so repeatedly log at error level instead
of trying to avoid repetition.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12157
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
Failures are already logged at alert/error level above, so just log
the summary at notice level.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12157
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12151
This was already dropped in commit d678684695.
Signed-off-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Autobuild-User(master): Martin Schwenke <martins@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Wed Aug 17 09:22:13 CEST 2016 on sn-devel-144
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12152
This makes the behaviour of "ctdb addip" similar to "ctdb delip".
Signed-off-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Signed-off-by: Volker Lendecke <vl@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Autobuild-User(master): Jeremy Allison <jra@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Sat Aug 13 00:55:02 CEST 2016 on sn-devel-144
Signed-off-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Autobuild-User(master): Martin Schwenke <martins@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Wed Aug 10 08:17:13 CEST 2016 on sn-devel-144
The change to ctdbd.conf and removal of /etc/sysconfig/ctdb as a
configuration file makes RPM rename the latter with a .rpmsave suffix.
This means that a working configuration is moved aside on upgrade and
manual intervention is needed.
Avoid this by convincing RPM that the existing /etc/sysconfig/ctdb is
still a configuration file.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12125
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
Autobuild-User(master): Martin Schwenke <martins@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Mon Aug 8 11:30:58 CEST 2016 on sn-devel-144
The current message is broken:
Control SET_DB_PRIORITY is not implemented any more, use instead
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12126
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
Occurs on an invalid line that isn't the first. Isn't really a leak
because it is allocated off mem_ctx, which should be freed by the
caller.
BUG: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12110
Signed-off-by: Martin Schwenke <martin@meltin.net>
Reviewed-by: Amitay Isaacs <amitay@gmail.com>
