[PATCH]: Inconsistent recmaster during election.
martin at meltin.net
Mon Feb 8 03:08:08 UTC 2016
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 17:21:26 +1100, Martin Schwenke
<martin at meltin.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jan 2016 19:03:40 -0800, Kenny Dinh <kdinh at peaxy.net> wrote:
> > > "We need to figure out if some changes to winbind mean that this
> > particular smbcontrol is no longer required."
> > Do you mean recent patches to winbind? Do you want me to test with samba
> > 4.2.x or any newer version of samba, or would samba 4.2.3-10 and ctdb 2.5.4
> > be fine?
> I thought I saw some changes go by where winbind tracks IP addresses
> itself, or similar. I don't have enough context or time to be able to
> dig into this right now. But I am wondering if the smbcontrol is
> needed at all.
> At this point, my interest is in determining how necessary/important
> the smbcontrol is and consider allowing it to time out. In the best
> case we could remove it altogether.
We did some tests today. If you're running Samba 4.0.x or 4.1.x
(and I believe that you're running the latter) then you can just
comment out the "smbcontrol winbindd ip-dropped ..." lines from
49.winbind and 11.natgw.
There was a feature added in Samba 4.0 that makes winbindd track IP
address changes on Linux. A bug fix in Samba 4.2.2 (and later versions)
(original commit 0d161e42d9aeb155eae2b04eccec497b21de8029) caused a
regression in above feature, so it stopped working. This means that the
smbcontrol commands are needed again.
is tracking the fix. We would expect that the fix will appear in 4.4,
4.3 and 4.2.
When the above bug fix lands, we will open a bug to remove unnecessary
"smbcontrol winbindd ip-dropped ..." commands from CTDB.
peace & happiness,
More information about the samba-technical