Re: [ClusterLabs] Pacemaker quorum behavior

2016-09-09 Thread Ken Gaillot
On 09/09/2016 04:27 AM, Klaus Wenninger wrote: > On 09/08/2016 07:31 PM, Scott Greenlese wrote: >> >> Hi Klaus, thanks for your prompt and thoughtful feedback... >> >> Please see my answers nested below (sections entitled, "Scott's >> Reply"). Thanks! >> >> - Scott >> >> >> Scott Greenlese ... IBM

Re: [ClusterLabs] Pacemaker quorum behavior

2016-09-09 Thread Jan Pokorný
On 09/09/16 14:13 -0400, Scott Greenlese wrote: > You had mentioned this command: > > pstree -p | grep -A5 $(pidof -x pcs) > > I'm not quite sure what the $(pidof -x pcs) represents?? This is a "command substitution" shell construct (new, blessed form of `backtick` notation) that in this

Re: [ClusterLabs] "VirtualDomain is active on 2 nodes" due to transient network failure

2016-09-09 Thread Ken Gaillot
On 09/09/2016 02:47 PM, Scott Greenlese wrote: > Hi Ken , > > Below where you commented, > > "It's considered good practice to stop > pacemaker+corosync before rebooting a node intentionally (for even more > safety, you can put the node into standby first)." > > .. is this something that we

Re: [ClusterLabs] "VirtualDomain is active on 2 nodes" due to transient network failure

2016-09-09 Thread Scott Greenlese
Hi Ken , Below where you commented, "It's considered good practice to stop pacemaker+corosync before rebooting a node intentionally (for even more safety, you can put the node into standby first)." .. is this something that we document anywhere? Our 'reboot' action performs a halt (deactivate

Re: [ClusterLabs] Pacemaker quorum behavior

2016-09-09 Thread Scott Greenlese
Poki, Once again, I must apologize for presenting you and the users group with some mis-information.After triple checking my note log ... it seems that I described the two actions to you backwards, as it was the kill, not the gentle shutdown that I had issues with, and I had done them in the

Re: [ClusterLabs] When does Pacemaker shoot other nodes in the head

2016-09-09 Thread Ken Gaillot
On 09/09/2016 08:52 AM, Auer, Jens wrote: > Hi, > > a client asked me to describe the conditions when Pacemaker uses STONITH > to bring the cluster into a known state. The documentation says that > this happens when "we cannot establish with certainty a state of some > node or resource", but I

Re: [ClusterLabs] Pacemaker quorum behavior

2016-09-09 Thread Klaus Wenninger
On 09/08/2016 07:31 PM, Scott Greenlese wrote: > > Hi Klaus, thanks for your prompt and thoughtful feedback... > > Please see my answers nested below (sections entitled, "Scott's > Reply"). Thanks! > > - Scott > > > Scott Greenlese ... IBM Solutions Test, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. > INTERNET:

[ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: DRBD failover in Pacemaker

2016-09-09 Thread Ulrich Windl
>>> Dimitri Maziuk schrieb am 09.09.2016 um 02:17 in Nachricht <72d90bbe-1eb8-f2d8-e7d4-43e0a19b6...@bmrb.wisc.edu>: > On 09/08/2016 06:33 PM, Digimer wrote: > >> With 'fencing resource-and-stonith;' and a {un,}fence-handler set, DRBD >> will block when the peer is lost

[ClusterLabs] Antw: Pacemaker migration - how to?

2016-09-09 Thread Ulrich Windl
>>> Nurit Vilosny schrieb am 08.09.2016 um 16:44 in >>> Nachricht : > Hi everyone, > I have a very basic question that I couldn't find an answer for. > I am using the pacemaker to control a 3