Setting up CTDB on OCFS2 and VMs ...
Martin Schwenke
martin at meltin.net
Wed Dec 31 15:34:31 MST 2014
On Wed, 31 Dec 2014 15:46:30 +0000, Rowland Penny
<repenny241155 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I have investigated ctdb on my system and have come to the conclusion
> that ctdb is a *MESS*, don't believe me ? then consider this:
> root at cluster1:~# ls /var/ctdb
> iptables-ctdb.flock persistent state
> root at cluster1:~# ls /var/lib/ctdb
> iptables-ctdb.flock persistent state
> root at cluster1:~# ls /var/lib/lib/ctdb
> brlock.tdb.1 iptables-ctdb.flock persistent
> smbXsrv_open_global.tdb.1 smbXsrv_version_global.tdb.1
> dbwrap_watchers.tdb.1 locking.tdb.1 printer_list.tdb.1
> smbXsrv_session_global.tdb.1 state
> g_lock.tdb.1 notify_index.tdb.1 serverid.tdb.1
> smbXsrv_tcon_global.tdb.1
> root at cluster1:~# ls /var/ctdb/persistent/
> root at cluster1:~# ls /var/ctdb/state/
> failcount interface_modify_eth0.flock service_state
> root at cluster1:~# ls /var/lib/ctdb/persistent/
> root at cluster1:~# ls /var/lib/ctdb/state/
> failcount interface_modify_eth0.flock service_state
> root at cluster1:~# ls /var/lib/lib/ctdb/persistent/
> account_policy.tdb.1 ctdb.tdb.0 ctdb.tdb.1 group_mapping.tdb.1
> passdb.tdb.1 registry.tdb.1 secrets.tdb.1 share_info.tdb.1
> root at cluster1:~# ls /var/lib/lib/ctdb/state
> failcount interface_modify_eth0.flock persistent_health.tdb.1
> recdb.tdb.1 service_state
>
> Why have very similar data in 3 places ? why have the conf (which
> incidentaly isn't called a conf file) in a different place from the
> other ctdb files in /etc ?
Everything should be in /var/lib/ctdb/.
/var/lib/lib/ctdb/ is due to the Debian packaging bug that has already
been discussed. This is not CTDB's fault.
/var/ctdb/ is an old location that we still support as a fallback.
Unfortunately, until the daemon gets to a particular point
where /var/lib/ctdb/ is created, CTDB attempts to maintain backward
compatibility by using /var/ctdb/. That's clearly something we need to
clean up. However, it is superficial.
I don't think that makes CTDB a *MESS*. I think it means that CTDB has
a superficial bug. You're basing most of your evaluation on a Debian
packaging bug that we discussed weeks ago. :-(
peace & happiness,
martin
More information about the samba-technical
mailing list