> Well, that does not sound very polite to user :)
The thing that really threw me off was pacemaker rebooting the node as soon as
I'd try to start the cluster on it without the database running.
Is there a way to prevent this from happening? Some way to indicate to
Pacemaker, "Hey, I'm not
> Quick look at PAF manual gives
>
> you need to rebuild the PostgreSQL instance on the failed node
>
> did you do it? I am not intimately familiar with Postgres, but in this
> case I expect that you need to make database on node B secondary (slave,
> whatever it is called) to new master on node
On Thu, 2018-05-31 at 22:43 +0200, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
> On Thu, 31 May 2018 22:52:12 +0300
> Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
>
> > 31.05.2018 22:18, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais пишет:
> > > Sorry for getting back to you so late.
> > >
> > > On Fri, 25 May 2018 11:58:59 -0600
> > > Casey
On Thu, 31 May 2018 22:52:12 +0300
Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
> 31.05.2018 22:18, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais пишет:
> > Sorry for getting back to you so late.
> >
> > On Fri, 25 May 2018 11:58:59 -0600
> > Casey & Gina wrote:
> >
> >>> On May 25, 2018, at 7:01 AM, Casey Allen Shobe
> >>>
31.05.2018 22:18, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais пишет:
> Sorry for getting back to you so late.
>
> On Fri, 25 May 2018 11:58:59 -0600
> Casey & Gina wrote:
>
>>> On May 25, 2018, at 7:01 AM, Casey Allen Shobe
>>> wrote:
Actually, why is Pacemaker fencing the standby node just because a
31.05.2018 19:20, Casey & Gina пишет:
>> There is no "master node" in pacemaker. There is master/slave
>> resource so at the best it is "node on which specific resource has
>> master role". And we have no way to know which on which node you
>> resource had master role when you did it. Please be
Sorry for getting back to you so late.
On Fri, 25 May 2018 11:58:59 -0600
Casey & Gina wrote:
> > On May 25, 2018, at 7:01 AM, Casey Allen Shobe
> > wrote:
> >> Actually, why is Pacemaker fencing the standby node just because a
> >> resource fails to start there? I thought only the master
Since we had a few significant bug fixes, I decided to do one more
release candidate for Pacemaker version 2.0.0. If there are no serious
issues found with this one, the final will likely be released next
week.
Source code is available at:
On 31/05/18 11:42 -0500, Ken Gaillot wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-05-31 at 14:48 +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote:
>> I am soliciting feedback on these CIB features related questions,
>> please reply (preferably on-list so we have the shared collective
>> knowledge) if at least one of the questions is answered
On Thu, 2018-05-31 at 14:48 +0200, Jan Pokorný wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am soliciting feedback on these CIB features related questions,
> please reply (preferably on-list so we have the shared collective
> knowledge) if at least one of the questions is answered positively
> in your case (just tick
> There is no "master node" in pacemaker. There is master/slave resource
> so at the best it is "node on which specific resource has master role".
> And we have no way to know which on which node you resource had master
> role when you did it. Please be more specific, otherwise it is hard to
>
Hello,
I am soliciting feedback on these CIB features related questions,
please reply (preferably on-list so we have the shared collective
knowledge) if at least one of the questions is answered positively
in your case (just tick the respective "[ ]" boxes as "[x]").
Any other commentary also
ClusterLabs is happy to announce fence-agents v4.2.1, which is a
bugfix release for v4.2.0.
The source code is available at:
https://github.com/ClusterLabs/fence-agents/releases/tag/v4.2.1
The most significant enhancements in this release are:
- bugfixes and enhancements:
- fence_scsi: fix
13 matches
Mail list logo
