>>> Reid Wahl schrieb am 03.05.2022 um 10:16 in Nachricht
:
> On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 12:36 AM Ulrich Windl
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I'm familiar with cleaning up various failed resource actions via
> "crm_resource ‑C ‑r resource_name ‑N node_name ‑n operation".
>> However I wonder wha tthe
On 03.05.2022 10:40, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I don't use DRBD, but I can imagine:
> If DRBD does asynchronous replication, it may make sense not to promote the
> slave as master after an interrupte dconnection (such when the master died)
> (as
> this will cause some data loss).
> Probably
On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 12:36 AM Ulrich Windl
wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> I'm familiar with cleaning up various failed resource actions via
> "crm_resource -C -r resource_name -N node_name -n operation".
> However I wonder wha tthe correct paraneters for a failed fencing operation
> (that lingers around)
Hi!
I don't use DRBD, but I can imagine:
If DRBD does asynchronous replication, it may make sense not to promote the
slave as master after an interrupte dconnection (such when the master died) (as
this will cause some data loss).
Probably it only wants to switch roles when both nodes are online
Hi!
I'm familiar with cleaning up various failed resource actions via "crm_resource
-C -r resource_name -N node_name -n operation".
However I wonder wha tthe correct paraneters for a failed fencing operation
(that lingers around) are.
crm_mon found:
Failed Fencing Actions:
* reboot of h18
On 03.05.2022 00:25, Ken Gaillot wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-05-02 at 13:11 -0300, Salatiel Filho wrote:
>> Hi, Ken, here is the info you asked for.
>>
>>
>> # pcs constraint
>> Location Constraints:
>> Resource: fence-server1
>> Disabled on:
>> Node: server1 (score:-INFINITY)
>> Resource:
>>> Ken Gaillot schrieb am 02.05.2022 um 23:25 in
Nachricht
<94927004ea4d4dca222ebc842f62711ff73b0a2a.ca...@redhat.com>:
> On Mon, 2022‑05‑02 at 13:11 ‑0300, Salatiel Filho wrote:
>> Hi, Ken, here is the info you asked for.
>>
>>
>> # pcs constraint
>> Location Constraints:
>> Resource: