On 07.06.2022 11:50, Klaus Wenninger wrote:
>>
>> From the documentation is not clear to me whether this would be:
>> a) multiple fencing where ipmi would be first level and sbd would be a
>> second level fencing (where sbd always succeeds)
>> b) or this is considered a single level fencing with
On 07.06.2022 11:26, Zoran Bošnjak wrote:
>
> In the test scenario, the dummy resource is currently running on node1. I
> have simulated node failure by unplugging the ipmi AND host network
> interfaces from node1. The result was that node1 gets rebooted (by watchdog),
> but the rest of the
>>> Zoran Bošnjak schrieb am 07.06.2022 um 10:26 in
Nachricht <1951254459.265.1654590407828.javamail.zim...@via.si>:
> Hi, I need some help with correct fencing configuration in 5‑node cluster.
>
> The speciffic issue is that there are 3 rooms, where in addition to node
> failure scenario, each
On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 10:27 AM Zoran Bošnjak wrote:
>
> Hi, I need some help with correct fencing configuration in 5-node cluster.
>
> The speciffic issue is that there are 3 rooms, where in addition to node
> failure scenario, each room can fail too (for example in case of room power
>
On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 7:53 AM Ulrich Windl
wrote:
>
> >>> Andrei Borzenkov schrieb am 03.06.2022 um 17:04 in
> Nachricht <99f7746a-c962-33bb-6737-f88ba0128...@gmail.com>:
> > On 03.06.2022 16:51, Zoran Bošnjak wrote:
> >> Thanks for all your answers. Sorry, my mistake. The ipmi_watchdog is
Hi, I need some help with correct fencing configuration in 5-node cluster.
The speciffic issue is that there are 3 rooms, where in addition to node
failure scenario, each room can fail too (for example in case of room power
failure or room network failure).
room0: [ node0 ]
roomA: [ node1,
