On 29.03.2022 00:26, john tillman wrote:
>> On Mon, 2022-03-28 at 14:03 -0400, john tillman wrote:
>>> Greetings all,
>>>
>>> Is it possible to have an order constraint with a timeout? I can't
>>> find
>>> one but perhaps I am using the wrong keywords in google.
>>>
>>> I have several Filesystem
On Mon, 2022-03-28 at 17:26 -0400, john tillman wrote:
> > On Mon, 2022-03-28 at 14:03 -0400, john tillman wrote:
> > > Greetings all,
> > >
> > > Is it possible to have an order constraint with a timeout? I
> > > can't
> > > find
> > > one but perhaps I am using the wrong keywords in google.
>
> On Mon, 2022-03-28 at 14:03 -0400, john tillman wrote:
>> Greetings all,
>>
>> Is it possible to have an order constraint with a timeout? I can't
>> find
>> one but perhaps I am using the wrong keywords in google.
>>
>> I have several Filesystem resource and one nfs service resource. If
>> I
On Mon, 2022-03-28 at 14:03 -0400, john tillman wrote:
> Greetings all,
>
> Is it possible to have an order constraint with a timeout? I can't
> find
> one but perhaps I am using the wrong keywords in google.
>
> I have several Filesystem resource and one nfs service resource. If
> I
> create
Greetings all,
Is it possible to have an order constraint with a timeout? I can't find
one but perhaps I am using the wrong keywords in google.
I have several Filesystem resource and one nfs service resource. If I
create 3 order constraints:
pcs constraint order start fsRsc1 then start
Hi!
I want to keep you updated: The problem isn't fixed, still, so I
I'm running this simple script via cron to avoid uncontrolled kernel panic:
---snip---
#!/usr/bin/sh
# Detect RAM corruption. If detected log a message and reboot
# to prevent kernel panic
#cron jobs need a PATH
Corosync rings are never enough , especially when the network team has such
naughty hands.
Best Regards,Strahil Nikolov
On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 16:55, Ulrich
Windl wrote: >>> Strahil Nikolov via Users
schrieb am 28.03.2022 um
15:49 in Nachricht
>>> Strahil Nikolov via Users schrieb am 28.03.2022 um
15:49 in Nachricht <1758982440.559085.1648475365...@mail.yahoo.com>:
> One huge benefit of the new stack is that you can have 8 corosync rings,
> which is really powerful.
Hm I wonder:
If one ring is not good enough and two rings are not
One huge benefit of the new stack is that you can have 8 corosync rings, which
is really powerful.
Best Regards,Strahil Nikolov
On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 9:27, Christine caulfield wrote:
On 28/03/2022 03:30, Somanath Jeeva via Users wrote:
> Hi ,
>
> I am upgrading from corosync
On 28/03/2022 03:30, Somanath Jeeva via Users wrote:
Hi ,
I am upgrading from corosync 2.x/pacemaker 1.x to corosync 3.x/pacemaker
2.1.x
In our use case we are using a 2 node corosync/pacemaker cluster.
In corosync 2.x version I was using udpu as transport method. In the
corosync 3.x , as
10 matches
Mail list logo