Re: [ClusterLabs] Hypothetical question: transitions slow in one direction

2022-02-11 Thread Reid Wahl
On Friday, February 11, 2022, Reid Wahl wrote: > > > On Friday, February 11, 2022, john tillman wrote: >> Hypothetically, if I have a two node cluster on identical VMs without >> fencing and I see transitions take longer in one direction than the other. >> What are some possible reasons? >> >>

[ClusterLabs] Hypothetical question: transitions slow in one direction

2022-02-11 Thread Reid Wahl
On Friday, February 11, 2022, john tillman wrote: > Hypothetically, if I have a two node cluster on identical VMs without > fencing and I see transitions take longer in one direction than the other. > What are some possible reasons? > > For example, "pcs node standby nodeX" or "pcs cluster stop

[ClusterLabs] Hypothetical question: transitions slow in one direction

2022-02-11 Thread john tillman
Hypothetically, if I have a two node cluster on identical VMs without fencing and I see transitions take longer in one direction than the other. What are some possible reasons? For example, "pcs node standby nodeX" or "pcs cluster stop nodeX" results in a very fast transition to nodeY. However,

Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: [EXT] Re: what is the "best" way to completely shutdown a two-node cluster ?

2022-02-11 Thread Ken Gaillot
On Fri, 2022-02-11 at 08:07 +0100, Ulrich Windl wrote: > > > > Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais schrieb am > > > > 10.02.2022 um > 16:40 in > Nachricht <20220210164000.2e395a37@karst>: > > On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 22:15:07 +0800 > > Roger Zhou via Users wrote: > > > > > On 2/9/22 17:46, Lentes, Bernd

Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: [EXT] Re: what is the "best" way to completely shutdown a two-node cluster ?

2022-02-11 Thread Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 08:07:33 +0100 "Ulrich Windl" wrote: > >> Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais schrieb am 10.02.2022 um > 16:40 in Nachricht <20220210164000.2e395a37@karst>: > > ... > > I wonder if after the cluster shutdown complete, the target-role=Stopped > > could be removed/edited offline

Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: [EXT] Cluster Removing VIP and Not Following Order Constraint

2022-02-11 Thread Strahil Nikolov via Users
Ah, it's a HANA. Last HANA I did had something like this: colocation  constraint-> VIP with Master HANAorder constraint -> First HANA clone (don't specify master role) -> then IP That way ,when the standby HANA joins and the master is demoted (kind of challanged) and afterwards samo old primary

Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: [EXT] Cluster Removing VIP and Not Following Order Constraint

2022-02-11 Thread Jonno
Hello all, Thank you for your assistance. Below is the config from my lab environment. By the way, I just tried Strahil's suggestions, but it didn't seem to have any effect on the behaviour. Regards, Jonathan node 1: senzhana3 \ attributes hana_abc_op_mode=logreplay

Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: [EXT] Cluster Removing VIP and Not Following Order Constraint

2022-02-11 Thread Klaus Wenninger
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 9:13 AM Strahil Nikolov via Users < users@clusterlabs.org> wrote: > Shouldn't you use kind ' Mandatory' and simetrical TRUE ? > > If true, the reverse of the constraint applies for the opposite action > (for example, if B starts after A starts, then B stops before A

Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: [EXT] Cluster Removing VIP and Not Following Order Constraint

2022-02-11 Thread Strahil Nikolov via Users
Shouldn't you use kind ' Mandatory' and simetrical TRUE ? If true, the reverse of the constraint applies for the opposite action (for example, if B starts after A starts, then B stops before A stops).  Best Regards,Strahil Nikolov On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 9:11, Ulrich Windl wrote: >>>