db1076 crashed today, and the logs show BBU failure:
[13:57:22] <+icinga-wm> PROBLEM - Host db1076 is DOWN: PING CRITICAL - Packet loss = 100%
/system1/log1/record17
Targets
Properties
number=17
severity=Caution
date=10/06/2020
time=13:47
description=Smart Storage Battery failure (Battery 1, service information: 0x0A). Action: Gather AHS log and contact Support
Verbs
cd version exit showThis host is going away soon as part of the refresh (T264584)
| Subject | Repo | Branch | Lines +/- | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| db1076: Add clarification comment on BBU status | operations/puppet | production | +1 -0 |
| Status | Subtype | Assigned | Task | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unknown Object (Task) | |||||
| Resolved | Marostegui | T258361 Productionize db1155-db1175 and refresh and decommission db1074-db1095 (22 servers) | |||
| Declined | None | T258386 db1080-95 batch possibly suffering BBU issues | |||
| Resolved | Marostegui | T264755 db1076 crashed - BBU failure |
Mentioned in SAL (#wikimedia-operations) [2020-10-06T14:03:54Z] <marostegui> Power cycle db1076 T264755
The battery is gone:
root@db1076:~# hpssacli controller all show detail | grep Battery No-Battery Write Cache: Disabled Battery/Capacitor Count: 0
Mentioned in SAL (#wikimedia-operations) [2020-10-06T14:08:00Z] <marostegui> Reboot db1076 for kernel upgrade T264755
Change 632494 had a related patch set uploaded (by Marostegui; owner: Marostegui):
[operations/puppet@production] db1076: Add clarification comment on BBU status
Change 632494 merged by Marostegui:
[operations/puppet@production] db1076: Add clarification comment on BBU status
I have rebooted the host to make sure it boots up cleanly and to get it on the newest kernel.
Let's leave the controller on write through policy and if we see that the server cannot keep up, we can force it to WB, but I don't expect that to happen, as it hasn't happened with others in the past since we migrated to SSDs.
MySQL has started and recovered from the crash, I am going to let replication catch up and then start a table comparison to make sure we are good on the data consistency side
Comparison between the master and this host started for the following tables:
actor actor_id archive ar_id change_tag ct_id comment comment_id logging log_id page page_id revision rev_id revision_actor_temp revactor_rev revision_comment_temp revcomment_rev slots slot_revision_id text old_id user user_id watchlist wl_id ipblocks ipb_id page page_id
Mentioned in SAL (#wikimedia-operations) [2020-10-07T09:09:44Z] <marostegui@cumin1001> dbctl commit (dc=all): 'Repool db1076 T264755 ', diff saved to https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/P12943 and previous config saved to /var/cache/conftool/dbconfig/20201007-090943-marostegui.json
The table comparison came back clean. I have repooled the host.
This host is a candidate master for s2, so it runs stretch and 10.1. It will be replaced during Q2 (T258361), so probably not worth rebuilding another host to replace it.
If this host would need to become master for any reason, the broken BBU shouldn't degrade its performance by running it with WT instead of WB policy. We can always force WB if we see that during its slave role it gets behind.
Resolving this for now.