Re: ASM Instance Not Up Due to Private IP mismatch between Nodes
- From: Allan Nelson <anelson77388@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: m.mudhalvan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 07:56:41 -0500
The 169.254 addresses are what are termed zero conf addresses. You can
google for more information on that topic if you are interested. They are
being provided by a new feature of clusterware in 11.2.0.2 whoose name
escapes me at the moment. They are being used because your 192.168
addresses have different subnet masks. eth1 has a subnet mask of
255..255.255.0 and eth2 has a subnet mask of 255.255.0.0. When clusterware
came up after the boot it detected this misconfiguration. IP's that have
different subnet masks can't talk and so clusterware provieded addresses it
could use.
The RAC will run on these addresses without problems but my recommendation
to you would be to fix the misconfiguration of the 192.168 addresses and
restart your rac. It is messy to leave them misconfigured and you seem to
want your interconnect to be on 192.162 anyway.
Allan
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 3:57 AM, <m.mudhalvan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Gurus,
> Good Morning. We had two node RAC instance on 11g Rel 2 (11.2.0.2)
>
> Last Saturday we had some maintenance which involved the restart
> of the Instance including ASM instance. There is no Change in DB or ASM
> Side.
>
> When we tried to stop the ASM instance it failed and later it
> aborted by the cluster service stop command internally.
>
> When we bring the Node 1 again ASM instance is not started and
> keep getting terminated. When we closely check the alert log of both ASM
> Nodes found the private IP address is not matching. It was good until the
> restart . Since IP are not matching the Disk Groups are not getting
> mounted and it made us to restart the server then both ASM alert log
> showed as private interconnect IP as 169.254.x.x and everything is working
> fine.
>
> What is my questions to gurus/experts are
>
> 1. What might caused to change private interconnect IP
> segment even though we have specified the private interconnect segment as
> 192.168.x.x?
>
> 2. Do we have any problem since both nodes are running on
> private Interconnect IP segment 169.254.x.x?
>
>
> Node 1: ASM Alert Log
> Private Interface 'eth1' configured from GPnP for use as a private
> interconnect.
> [name='eth1', type=1, ip=192.168.X.X, net=192.168.X.0/24,
> mask=255.255.255.0, use=cluster_interconnect/6]
>
> Node 2: ASM Alert Log
> Private Interface 'eth1:1' configured from GPnP for use as a private
> interconnect.
> [name='eth1:1', type=1, ip=169.254.X.X, net=169.254.X.X/16,
> mask=255.255.0.0, use=haip:cluster_interconnect/62]
>
> Alert Log in Databases - Occurred multiple times
>
> CRS-2302:Cannot get GPnP profile. Error CLSGPNP_NO_DAEMON (GPNPD daemon is
> not running)
>
> CRS-5019:All OCR locations are on ASM disk groups [DG_DATA01], and none of
> these disk groups are mounted.
>
>
>
> Thanks & Regards
> Mudhalvan M.M
>
> Infrastructure Management Division
> Tel. 042(319)4516 Ext. 34516
> Mobile 81-80-4890-1973
> Email m.mudhalvan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> $B!V(B $B$=$N@h$O!"$"$*$>$i!#(B $B!W(B
> $BCm!'$3$N(BE-mail$B$O!"5!L)>pJs$r4^$s$G$*$j!"H/?.<T$,0U?^$7$?(B
> $B<u?.<T$N$_$,MxMQ(B
> $B$9$k$3$H$r0U?^$7$?$b$N$G$9!#K|$,0l!"5.EB(B
> $B$,$3$N(BE-mail$B$NH/?.<T$,0U?^$7$?<u(B
> $B?.<T$G$J$$>l9g$K$O!"$3(B
> $B$N(BE-mail$B$N0u:~!"%3%T!<!"E>Aw$=$NB>0l@Z$N;HMQ$O6X;_(B
> $B$5$l(B
> $B$^$9!#EvJ}$N8m$j$K$h$j$3$N(BE-mail$B$r$*<u$1<h$j$K$J$C$?>l9g(B
> $B$O!"$*<j?t$r(B
> $B$*$+$1$7$^$9$,!"$3$N(BE-mail$B$rGK4~$7!"D>$A$K$4O"(B
> $BMm$rD:BW$G$-$^$9$H9,$$$G$9(B
> $B!#(B
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> --
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
