[geeks] Sun SSP monkeying - any SSP 'experts' about?

[JP Hindin]

On Tue, 2 Sep 2014, Jonathan Katz wrote:
> Anything in the docs I gave you? Also, there is a /var/SUNWsms or
> /var/lib/ssp or something that may have the locks for who's the
> master.

Unfortunately the documentation you provided me - which has been useful in
plenty of ways architecturally, believe me - was written around the time
of the 3.1.1 release of the SSP software. The software appears to have
changed enough that most of the commands relating to this sort of thing
aren't much use.

I'm still ploughing through it, however. I did also find the documentation
for the 3.5 release of the SSP docs, I haven't started those yet.

As for the locks, I haven't catted those files out
(/var/opt/SUNWssp/.ssp_private... I spent a lot of time in there
yesterday:) so I don't even know what the contents are. I'll take a look,
that might be the magic button.

Thanks Jonathan;

 - JP

> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 6:45 PM, JP Hindin <jplist2008 at kiwigeek.com> wrote:
> > I have ended up with a pair of E10ks (one since dismantled for spares),
> > and a triplet of SSPs. Entertainingly, through surprise and misadventure
> > (and quite possibly related to the eventual decommissioning of both the
> > E10ks), all three of the SSPs are the "Spare" SSPs - not the MAINs.
> >
> > The one that already has the EEPROMs for the unit I'm trying to bring up
> > appears to not be fully installed right - it gives me the following each
> > time I try and run something useful:
> > fo_clt_get_host_role: door_call() failed, errno: 9
> > Unable to determine role of SSP
> > Is SSP initialization complete?
> >
> > The other two (one is a mirror of the other, I suspect one _was_ the MAIN
> > for that E10k, but it's internal disk died and it was simply cloned from
> > the corresponding Spare) do not give me such errors - but won't execute
> > any commands (ignoring the key differences to the E10k) because it's the
> > Spare SSP.
> >
> > All three machines are running SSP v3.5.0. The documentation suggests that
> > the appropriate way to force a fail-over is to run:
> > $ setfailover force
> > However I'm told (by setfailover) that the command can only be run _on_
> > the MAIN... which appears to badly defeat the purpose of having a failover
> > setup, unless it failed in such a graceful way as to allow the Spare to
> > be told to take-over.
> >
> > I've tried doing an ssp-unconfig/ssp-config to rebuild the setup on the
> > first SSP (with the init complaints), but it never actually asks the
> > question "Am I the MAIN SSP?" at the end like the documentation says it
> > should.
> >
> > Frankly, I'm running out of braincells here to come up with something else
> > to try.
> >
> > I'd sure love some suggestions.
> >
> >  - JP
> > _______________________________________________
> > GEEKS:  http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/geeks
>
>
>
> --
> -Jon
> +32 0 486 260 686
> _______________________________________________
> GEEKS:  http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/geeks