Cluster upgrade not working...

Discussion in 'Installation/Configuration' started by bc2946088, May 23, 2012.

  1. bc2946088

    bc2946088 New Member

    I went from on my master no problem, but on the slave, it asks for mysql information then fails. I turned on debugging and ran the on the slave and here is the output.

    root@ws02:/home/administrator# /usr/local/ispconfig/server/
    23.05.2012-11:51 - DEBUG - Set Lock: /usr/local/ispconfig/server/temp/.ispconfig_lock
    23.05.2012-11:51 - WARNING - Unable to connect to local server.
    23.05.2012-11:51 - DEBUG - No Updated records found, starting only the core.
    23.05.2012-11:51 - DEBUG - Remove Lock: /usr/local/ispconfig/server/temp/.ispconfig_lock

    Is this failing to connect to mysql?

  2. bc2946088

    bc2946088 New Member

    I'm guessing it's that, since here is the error message from the upgrade proccess..

    Checking ISPConfig database .. OK
    Unable to read server configuration from database.
  3. till

    till Super Moderator Staff Member ISPConfig Developer


    Yes. The /usr/local/ispconfig/server/lib/ file is missing or contains wrong data. You should restore it from the backup.
  4. bc2946088

    bc2946088 New Member

    What's strange to me, is that the master is missing elements that I would think it should have. The dbmaster_type is pretty much empty, missing user, host, etc..

    The current and backup of the slave has those elements filled in. Should I have chose yes to the reconfigure permissions on the database on the master? I chose no...
  5. bc2946088

    bc2946088 New Member

    I think I know when and how I messed it up. Awhile back, the mysql master/slave wasnt working. I can't remember, but I likely restored some the master db to the slave.

    My best bet, might be to uninstall ispconfig from the slave and reinstall it from scratch, setting everything up again.
  6. till

    till Super Moderator Staff Member ISPConfig Developer

    On the master server the dbmaster fields must be empty, otherwise it would be a slave and not the master. The dbmaster fields are onyl for the slave server.

    No, thats not nescessary for a update between and as the database permissions have not be changed.

Share This Page