Re: [ClusterLabs] issues with pacemaker daemonization

vice engine loaded: > corosync configuration service [1] > > [19040] dl380x4415 corosyncinfo[QB] server name: cfg > > [19040] dl380x4415 corosyncnotice [SERV ] Service engine loaded: > corosync cluster closed process group service v1.01 [2] > > [19040] dl3

[ClusterLabs] pcs authentication fails

Hi Clusterlabs mailing list, I'm having issues running pcs authentication on RH cent os 7.0/7.1 (Please see log below). It's important to mention that pcs authentication with RH cent os 7.2/7.4 and with the same setup and packages is working. [root@ufm-host42-014 tmp]# cat /etc/redhat-release

[ClusterLabs] Pacemaker responsible of DRBD and a systemd resource

Hello there, First post here but following since a while! Here’s my issue, we are putting in place and running this type of cluster since a while and never really encountered this kind of problem. I recently set up a Corosync / Pacemaker / PCS cluster to manage DRBD along with different other

Re: [ClusterLabs] One cluster with two groups of nodes

> > The first thing I'd mention is that a 6-node cluster can only survive > the loss of two nodes, as 3 nodes don't have quorum. You can tweak that > behavior with corosync quorum options, or you could add a quorum-only > node, or use corosync's new qdevice capability to have an arbiter node. > >

Re: [ClusterLabs] Issue in starting Pacemaker Virtual IP in RHEL 7

On 06/11/17 10:43 +, Somanath Jeeva wrote: > I am using a two node pacemaker cluster with teaming enabled. The cluster has > > 1. Two team interfaces with different subents. > > 2. The team1 has a NFS VIP plumbed to it. > > 3. The VirtualIP from pacemaker is configured to

Re: [ClusterLabs] Pacemaker 1.1.18 Release Candidate 4

On Fri, 2017-11-03 at 08:24 +0100, Kristoffer Grönlund wrote: > Ken Gaillot writes: > > > I decided to do another release candidate, because we had a large > > number of changes since rc3. The fourth release candidate for > > Pacemaker > > version 1.1.18 is now available at:

Re: [ClusterLabs] issues with pacemaker daemonization

On Thu, 2017-11-09 at 15:59 +0530, ashutosh tiwari wrote: > Hi, > > We are observing that sometime pacemaker daemon gets the same > processgroup id as the process /script calling the "service pacemaker > start".  > While child processes of pacemaeker(cib/crmd/pengine) have there > processgroup id 

Re: [ClusterLabs] One cluster with two groups of nodes

On Wed, 2017-11-08 at 23:04 -0400, Alberto Mijares wrote: > Hi guys, nice to say hello here. > > I've been assigned with a very particular task: There's a > pacemaker-based cluster with 6 nodes. A system runs on three nodes > (group A), while the other three are hot-standby spares (group B). > >

Re: [ClusterLabs] Pacemaker resource start delay when there are another resource is starting

>Also, I forgot about the undocumented/unsupported start-delay operation >attribute, that you can put on the status operation to delay the first >monitor. That may give you the behavior you want. I have try to add "start-delay=60s" to monitor operation. The first monitor was really delayed as

[ClusterLabs] issues with pacemaker daemonization

Hi, We are observing that sometime pacemaker daemon gets the same processgroup id as the process /script calling the "service pacemaker start". While child processes of pacemaeker(cib/crmd/pengine) have there processgroup id same as there pid which is how things should be for a daemon afaik. Do