[SOLVED] Why do KNET chose ring with higher priority instead of lower one (as said in manual?)

Whatever

Active Member
Nov 19, 2012
267
13
38
Could anyone explain why do corosync (KNET) choose best link with the highest priority instead of the lowest one (as written in PVE wiki)?

Very confused with corosync3 indeed...

Code:
quorum {
  provider: corosync_votequorum
}

totem {
  cluster_name: amarao-cluster
  config_version: 20
  interface {
    bindnetaddr: 172.16.253.101
    ringnumber: 0
    linknumber: 0
    knet_link_priority: 10
  }
  interface {
    bindnetaddr: 172.16.252.101
    ringnumber: 1
    linknumber: 1
    knet_link_priority: 1
  }
  ip_version: ipv4
  rrp_mode: passive
  secauth: on
  version: 2
  token: 5000
}

Code:
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 pmxcfs[2871]: [dcdb] notice: wrote new corosync config '/etc/corosync/corosync.conf' (version = 20)
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [CFG   ] Config reload requested by node 2
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [TOTEM ] Configuring link 0
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [TOTEM ] Configured link number 0: local addr: 172.16.253.101, port=5405
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [TOTEM ] Configuring link 1
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [TOTEM ] Configured link number 1: local addr: 172.16.252.101, port=5406
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [KNET  ] host: host: 6 (passive) best link: 0 (pri: 10)
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [KNET  ] host: host: 6 (passive) best link: 0 (pri: 10)
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [KNET  ] host: host: 8 (passive) best link: 0 (pri: 10)
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [KNET  ] host: host: 8 (passive) best link: 0 (pri: 10)
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [KNET  ] host: host: 7 (passive) best link: 0 (pri: 10)
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [KNET  ] host: host: 7 (passive) best link: 0 (pri: 10)
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [KNET  ] host: host: 5 (passive) best link: 0 (pri: 10)
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [KNET  ] host: host: 5 (passive) best link: 0 (pri: 10)
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [KNET  ] host: host: 4 (passive) best link: 0 (pri: 10)
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [KNET  ] host: host: 4 (passive) best link: 0 (pri: 10)
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [KNET  ] host: host: 3 (passive) best link: 0 (pri: 10)
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [KNET  ] host: host: 3 (passive) best link: 0 (pri: 10)
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [KNET  ] host: host: 2 (passive) best link: 0 (pri: 10)
Sep 14 11:19:09 pve-node1 corosync[3056]:   [KNET  ] host: host: 2 (passive) best link: 0 (pri: 10) 
...
 

aasami

Active Member
Mar 9, 2016
39
7
28
22
Here is an answer...
https://github.com/corosync/corosync/commit/0a323ff2ed0f2aff9cb691072906e69cb96ed662

PVE wiki should be get updated accordingly

Dumn corosync...

That change of one word from "lowest" to "highest" doesn't explain anything.
the active link with the highest priority will be used. If one or more
The highest priority will allways be 1. Everything else is lower priority.
So, when something is named as priority everyone is assuming decelerating importance.
May be because I'm not a native english speaker, I would rather named it "weight" over "priority".
That would imply: more weighted route is more important.
 

About

The Proxmox community has been around for many years and offers help and support for Proxmox VE, Proxmox Backup Server, and Proxmox Mail Gateway.
We think our community is one of the best thanks to people like you!

Get your subscription!

The Proxmox team works very hard to make sure you are running the best software and getting stable updates and security enhancements, as well as quick enterprise support. Tens of thousands of happy customers have a Proxmox subscription. Get your own in 60 seconds.

Buy now!