From owner-freebsd-virtualization@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 19 12:49:18 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC8DC77B for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 12:49:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vvm@tut.by) Received: from mail-ea0-x236.google.com (mail-ea0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c01::236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 35CBE2B26 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 12:49:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ea0-f182.google.com with SMTP id o10so4125914eaj.41 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 05:49:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tut.by; s=google; h=message-id:from:to:references:subject:date:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xohDgno3cJ4M0aKbrR0LS0NruSSi6I9keX+cIJuvJak=; b=H5rhVtCtaqDrb+Pm7PDYaX9YNJElIW1N2evX+KRaDSgbcPaeJN5+6nwITNzXPEiEOo O8ggOscV+5yCfRQJamvRf9876w5BYFw+XoVW00M4Tiac4XP1+6RSCNkOOgHeE6bsgLAq JSxIbDTI0EvvefohHNjVwST+n+1OjlJTT09B4= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:from:to:references:subject:date :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xohDgno3cJ4M0aKbrR0LS0NruSSi6I9keX+cIJuvJak=; b=kBXm+7nvMrdcvlFGayE8BAoMEFQcTpniikmrbyC4Gvxg9siYyjGPByqaAm+weJbj7Z p45YvE53JyXjHBgQL1IfW53IY9JRgmS+X3jPDOWVBD+F7U7xRfBCyTRIXaY7OKqgmsqO 7XkdJ3jq9oOufRgmzEYRMPx426kixYYc95I4WQTYYZINDA5+dCfFs2qdK3I+srK5TJcs rWC+lDbeAEcICvT7hMeJUBZ3PAIdE0p8n5SSRs4U1VJy/2i5FKSuPOo7G7w3fdbsj4mV fgdbdd0fmDsNRK6pKBjjNyjMf22LEOMI/ZcMeEoOdClECp0tmpyMfrYCff0FpG1Cvwzc CM/Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmmbOUZSqNN1I1oXk9zup4oz7d7tXCEeHp7UIG0kU0isaxamJWMrL9JIfV3fxVCVQdw2q7r X-Received: by 10.15.56.199 with SMTP id y47mr2015293eew.73.1379594956513; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 05:49:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from TSVVM2 (ns1.st.by. [217.23.123.90]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id k7sm11051040eeg.13.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 19 Sep 2013 05:49:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <49A87DAF747B4037BF2C1E512F0336AD@local.st.by> From: "Victor Miasnikov" To: "Abhishek Gupta \(LIS\)" , "Karl Pielorz" , References: <18D121A056145C32F0501114@Mail-PC.tdx.co.uk> <155969fa70a34e41a84649bf3cb81c21@BL2PR03MB210.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>, <4787C47D82401721B4C53B49@Mail-PC.tdx.co.uk> <9cabc6fbba754dd3aa357943ef82db22@BL2PR03MB210.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <72995083316B4133B0C282D493DDB128@local.st.by> Subject: Re: turn off 220V on UPS device =} file system got corrupted Re: Hyper-V 2012 Cluster / Failover - supported? - Any known issues? Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 15:49:13 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="ISO-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.4548 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4913 X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 12:49:18 -0000 Hi! A.G.> if high availability failover scenarios will work for FreeBSD VMs on Hyper-V. A.G.>if the power plug is pulled from the Hyper-V server then would the FreeBSD VM failover and restart without any issues on the failover server. Karl, are You want this behavior: == you walk up and yank the power cord out of the back of the server the secondary mirror will take over with zero client downtime == or? Karl, are You use entry level fault tolerant system ftServer 2600 by Stratus Technologies? Or analog? If "no use" , then read some info about real Hyper-V Fault Tolerance : http://vvm.blog.tut.by/2013/09/19/fault-tolerant-solutions-for-hyper-v/ Or vice versa, for example: === Q: I've got a two node server-cluster, Windows 20XX x64, Hyper-V and CSV, Everything seems to be working fine along with live migration. I am currently testing the functionality of the setup, he is my current layout: Node A:VM 1 Node B:VM 2 When I simulate a host failure on node A, VM 1 transfers over to Node B but reboots the virtual machine before bringing it back up. Is this normal behavior for Clustering with CSV? I have another cluster setup in the same manner but without CSV enabled, Its been a while but I'm sure when this was tested the Virtual machine that failed over didn't reboot. Is this a difference between High availability and Fault tolerance? . . . A: there are third parties, such as Stratus, that create a mirrored environment between two systems in order to keep two copies up to date. As you can imagine, there are additional costs involved in such a solution as this, so you need to make the business case for 100% availability. == >> When I simulate a host failure on node A, VM 1 transfers over to Node B but reboots A.G.> without any issues Restart, but _very_ often with _big_ problem Best regards, Victor Miasnikov Blog: http://vvm.blog.tut.by/ P.S. Even with Fault Tolerance remember about non-hardware issue: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/clustering/archive/2010/10/06/10072013.aspx == FT solutions provide great resilience to hardware faults, such as if you walk up and yank the power cord out of the back of the server the secondary mirror will take over with zero client downtime.However, remember that FT solutions are running a common operating system across those systems.In the event that there is a software fault (such as a hang or crash), both machines are affected and the entire solution goes down.There is no protection from software fault scenarios and at the same time you are doubling your hardware and maintenance costs.At the end of the day while a FT solution may promise zero downtime for unplanned failures, it is in reality only to a small set of failure conditions.With a loosely coupled HA solution such as Failover Clustering, in the event of a hang or blue screen from a buggy driver or leaky application == ----- Original Message ----- From: "Abhishek Gupta (LIS)" To: "Victor Miasnikov"; "Karl Pielorz"; freebsd-virtualization freebsd.org Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 9:18 PM Subject: RE: turn off 220V on UPS device =} file system got corrupted Re: Hyper-V 2012 Cluster / Failover - supported? - Any known issues? Hi Victor, Karl is asking if high availability failover scenarios will work for FreeBSD VMs on Hyper-V. He was specifically interested in knowing if the power plug is pulled from the Hyper-V server then would the FreeBSD VM failover and restart without any issues on the failover server. My response was that yes the above scenario should work. Thanks, Abhishek -----Original Message----- From: Victor Miasnikov [mailto:vvm@tut.by] Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 8:46 AM To: Abhishek Gupta (LIS); Karl Pielorz; freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Subject: turn off 220V on UPS device =} file system got corrupted Re: Hyper-V 2012 Cluster / Failover - supported? - Any known issues? Hi! K.P.> - Pulling the power on the active node hosting both VM's (i.e. Windows K.P.> guest, and FreeBSD guest) - this showed the remaining node trying to bring K.P.> up the VM's (of which Windows came up OK, and FreeBSD [file system] got corrupted). A.G.> Yes, it should work. A.G.>My understanding is that the failover should be agnostic to the guest OS but there could be some integration component that we might have missed. What _exactly_ "should work" ? 1) This issue not related Hyper-V cluster itself !) When "Pulling the power" i.e. turn off 220V in Europa ( or 110V in USA ) on UPS device _both_ FAT on Windows and FreeBSD [file system] got corrupted ( "Windows came up OK" look like because on this VM file system is NTFS ) K.P.> Hyper-V correctly see's the node fail, and restarts both VM's on the K.P.> remaining node. Windows 7 boots fine (says it wasn't shut down correctly - K.P.> which is correct) - but FreeBSD doesn't survive. K.P.> K.P.> At boot time we get a blank screen with "-" on it (i.e. the first part of K.P.> the boot 'spinner') - and nothing else. K.P.> K.P.> Booting to a network copy of FreeBSD and looking at the underlying virtual K.P.> disk - it appears to be trashed. You can mount it (but it understandably K.P.> warns it's not clean) - however, any access leads to an instant panic ('bad K.P.> dir ino 2 at offset 0: mangled entry'). K.P.> K.P.> Trying to run fsck against the file system throws up an impressive amounts K.P.> of 'bad magic' errors and 'rebuild cylinder group?' prompts. To Karl: I ask You about some details . . . Are You see related e-mail? Best regards, Victor Miasnikov Blog: http://vvm.blog.tut.by/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Abhishek Gupta (LIS)" To: "Karl Pielorz" Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 5:50 PM Subject: RE: Hyper-V 2012 Cluster / Failover - supported? - Any known issues? > Thanks again Karl! Yes, it should work. >My understanding is that the failover should be agnostic to the guest OS but there could be some integration component >that we might have missed. >So it would be good to get to the bottom of this. > > Regards, > > Abhishek ________________________________________ > From: Karl Pielorz > Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 7:45 AM > To: Abhishek Gupta (LIS); > Subject: RE: Hyper-V 2012 Cluster / Failover - supported? - Any known issues? > > --On 18 September 2013 14:23 +0000 "Abhishek Gupta (LIS)" > wrote: > >> Hi Karl, >> >> Thanks for reporting the issue. Please give us some time to investigate >> and get back to you on this. In the meantime I wanted to ask if setting >> up a Hyper-V replica for the FreeBSD VM and then a manual failover >> reproduces the same symptoms? Please let me know. > > Hi, > > Manual fail-over appears to work OK - in order, I tested: > > - Live migration from one node to the other, and back again (worked) > > - Stopping the cluster service on one of the nodes (i.e. from Failover > Cluster Manager) - this showed the VM moving from the node that was > stopped, over to the other node (again worked). > > - Pulling the power on the active node hosting both VM's (i.e. Windows > guest, and FreeBSD guest) - this showed the remaining node trying to bring > up the VM's (of which Windows came up OK, and FreeBSD got corrupted). > > > I've had to stop now as the guy here looking after the Synology kit on the > test network is applying a firmware update (this is apparently for some > appletalk issue or something). > > I'll re-run the test after this has been done - if it still fails, I'll > come back with a 'how to reproduce' type report (and I'll obviously let you > know if we can't reproduce it again!). > > At least I know it 'should' work now :) > > Thanks, > > -Karl