[ClusterLabs] Antw: ocf:lvm2:VolumeGroup Probe Issue

>>> Marc Smith schrieb am 08.11.2016 um 17:37 in Nachricht : > Hi, > > First, I realize ocf:lvm2:VolumeGroup comes from the LVM2 package and > not resource-agents, but I'm hoping someone on this list is

Re: [ClusterLabs] Resources wont start on new node unless it is the only active node

I had a feeling it was something to do with that. It was confusing because I could use the move command to move between my three original hosts, just not the fourth. Then there was the device not found errors which added to the confusion. I have the resource stickiness set because I have critical

Re: [ClusterLabs] Resources wont start on new node unless it is the only active node

On 11/08/2016 12:54 PM, Ryan Anstey wrote: > I've been running a ceph cluster with pacemaker for a few months now. > Everything has been working normally, but when I added a fourth node it > won't work like the others, even though their OS is the same and the > configs are all synced via salt. I

Re: [ClusterLabs] pacemaker after upgrade from wheezy to jessie

On 11/07/2016 09:08 AM, Toni Tschampke wrote: > We managed to change the validate-with option via workaround (cibadmin > export & replace) as setting the value with cibadmin --modify doesn't > write the changes to disk. > > After experimenting with various schemes (xml is correctly interpreted >

Re: [ClusterLabs] DRBD demote/promote not called - Why? How to fix?

On 11/04/2016 01:57 PM, CART Andreas wrote: > Hi > > I have a basic 2 node active/passive cluster with Pacemaker (1.1.14 , > pcs: 0.9.148) / CMAN (3.0.12.1) / Corosync (1.4.7) on RHEL 6.8. > This cluster runs NFS on top of DRBD (8.4.4). > > Basically the system is working on both nodes and I

Re: [ClusterLabs] Live migration not working on shutdown

On 11/04/2016 05:51 AM, IT Nerb GmbH wrote: > Zitat von Klaus Wenninger : > >> On 11/02/2016 06:32 PM, Ken Gaillot wrote: >>> On 10/26/2016 06:12 AM, Rainer Nerb wrote: Hello all, we're currently testing a 2-node-cluster with 2 vms and live migration on

Re: [ClusterLabs] Preventing switchover in case of failing ping node

On 11/03/2016 08:49 AM, Detlef Gossrau wrote: > Hi all, > > is it possible to prevent a switchover in a active/passive cluster if a > ping node completely fails ? > > Situation: > > A ping node is put into maintenance and not reachable for a certain > time. The cluster nodes getting the

Re: [ClusterLabs] How Pacemaker reacts to fast changes of the same parameter in configuration

On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 12:54:10PM +0100, Klaus Wenninger wrote: > On 11/08/2016 11:40 AM, Kostiantyn Ponomarenko wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I need a way to do a manual fail-back on demand. > > To be clear, I don't want it to be ON/OFF; I want it to be more like > > "one shot". > > So far I found that

Re: [ClusterLabs] ocf:lvm2:VolumeGroup Probe Issue

Perfect, thanks for the quick reply. --Marc On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Ken Gaillot wrote: > On 11/08/2016 10:37 AM, Marc Smith wrote: >> Hi, >> >> First, I realize ocf:lvm2:VolumeGroup comes from the LVM2 package and >> not resource-agents, but I'm hoping someone on

[ClusterLabs] ocf:lvm2:VolumeGroup Probe Issue

Hi, First, I realize ocf:lvm2:VolumeGroup comes from the LVM2 package and not resource-agents, but I'm hoping someone on this list is familiar with this RA and can provide some insight. In my cluster configuration, I'm using ocf:lvm2:VolumeGroup to manage my LVM VG's, and I'm using the cluster

Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: What is the logic when two node are down at the same time and needs to be fenced

On 11/8/2016 5:08 PM, Ulrich Windl wrote: Niu Sibo schrieb am 07.11.2016 um 16:59 in Nachricht <5820a4cc.9030...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>: Hi Ken, Thanks for the clarification. Now I have another real problem that needs your advise. The cluster consists of 5 nodes

Re: [ClusterLabs] How Pacemaker reacts to fast changes of the same parameter in configuration

On 11/08/2016 11:40 AM, Kostiantyn Ponomarenko wrote: > Hi, > > I need a way to do a manual fail-back on demand. > To be clear, I don't want it to be ON/OFF; I want it to be more like > "one shot". > So far I found that the most reasonable way to do it - is to set > "resource stickiness" to a

[ClusterLabs] How Pacemaker reacts to fast changes of the same parameter in configuration

Hi, I need a way to do a manual fail-back on demand. To be clear, I don't want it to be ON/OFF; I want it to be more like "one shot". So far I found that the most reasonable way to do it - is to set "resource stickiness" to a different value, and then set it back to what it was. To do that I

Re: [ClusterLabs] permissions under /etc/corosync/qnetd

Ferenc Wágner napsal(a): Jan Friesse writes: Ferenc Wágner napsal(a): Have you got any plans/timeline for 2.4.2 yet? Yep, I'm going to release it in few minutes/hours. Man, that was quick. I've got a bunch of typo fixes queued..:) Please consider announcing

[ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: What is the logic when two node are down at the same time and needs to be fenced

>>> Niu Sibo schrieb am 07.11.2016 um 16:59 in Nachricht <5820a4cc.9030...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>: > Hi Ken, > > Thanks for the clarification. Now I have another real problem that needs > your advise. > > The cluster consists of 5 nodes and one of the node got a 1

[ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: Antw: Pacemaker 1.1.16 - Release Candidate 1

>>> Ken Gaillot schrieb am 07.11.2016 um 16:15 in >>> Nachricht : > On 11/07/2016 01:41 AM, Ulrich Windl wrote: > Ken Gaillot schrieb am 04.11.2016 um 22:37 in > Nachricht >>