Re: [ClusterLabs] 2-Node Cluster - fencing with just one node running ?

On Thursday, August 4, 2022, Lentes, Bernd < bernd.len...@helmholtz-muenchen.de> wrote: > - On 4 Aug, 2022, at 19:46, Reid Wahl nw...@redhat.com wrote: > >>> It shuts down ha-idg-2: >>> 2022-08-03T01:19:51.866200+02:00 ha-idg-2 systemd-logind[1535]: Power key >>> pressed. >>>

Re: [ClusterLabs] 2-Node Cluster - fencing with just one node running ?

- On 4 Aug, 2022, at 19:46, Reid Wahl nw...@redhat.com wrote: >> It shuts down ha-idg-2: >> 2022-08-03T01:19:51.866200+02:00 ha-idg-2 systemd-logind[1535]: Power key >> pressed. >> 2022-08-03T01:19:52.048335+02:00 ha-idg-2 systemd-logind[1535]: System is >> powering down. >>

Re: [ClusterLabs] 2-Node Cluster - fencing with just one node running ?

On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 7:40 AM Lentes, Bernd wrote: > > > - On 4 Aug, 2022, at 15:14, arvidjaar arvidj...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On 04.08.2022 16:06, Lentes, Bernd wrote: > >> > >> - On 4 Aug, 2022, at 00:27, Reid Wahl nw...@redhat.com wrote: > >> > >> Would do you mean by "banned" ? "crm

Re: [ClusterLabs] 2-Node Cluster - fencing with just one node running ?

On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 6:07 AM Lentes, Bernd wrote: > > > - On 4 Aug, 2022, at 00:27, Reid Wahl nw...@redhat.com wrote: > > > > > Such constraints are unnecessary. > > > > Let's say we have two stonith devices called "fence_dev1" and > > "fence_dev2" that fence nodes 1 and 2, respectively. If

Re: [ClusterLabs] 2-Node Cluster - fencing with just one node running ?

- On 4 Aug, 2022, at 15:14, arvidjaar arvidj...@gmail.com wrote: > On 04.08.2022 16:06, Lentes, Bernd wrote: >> >> - On 4 Aug, 2022, at 00:27, Reid Wahl nw...@redhat.com wrote: >> >> Would do you mean by "banned" ? "crm resource ban ..." ? >> Is that something different than a location

Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: [EXT] Re: Q: About a false negative of storage_mon

On 02/08/2022 14.37, Ulrich Windl wrote: "Fabio M. Di Nitto" schrieb am 02.08.2022 um 14:30 in Nachricht <0b26c097-1e21-3945-24ba-355cd0ccf...@fabbione.net>: Hello Kazunori-san, On 02/08/2022 12.13, 井上和徳 wrote: Hi, Since O_DIRECT is not specified in open() [1], it reads the buffer cache

Re: [ClusterLabs] 2-Node Cluster - fencing with just one node running ?

On 04.08.2022 16:06, Lentes, Bernd wrote: > > - On 4 Aug, 2022, at 00:27, Reid Wahl nw...@redhat.com wrote: > >> >> Such constraints are unnecessary. >> >> Let's say we have two stonith devices called "fence_dev1" and >> "fence_dev2" that fence nodes 1 and 2, respectively. If node 2 needs >>

Re: [ClusterLabs] 2-Node Cluster - fencing with just one node running ?

- On 4 Aug, 2022, at 00:27, Reid Wahl nw...@redhat.com wrote: > > Such constraints are unnecessary. > > Let's say we have two stonith devices called "fence_dev1" and > "fence_dev2" that fence nodes 1 and 2, respectively. If node 2 needs > to be fenced, and fence_dev2 is running on node 2,

[ClusterLabs] Antw: [EXT] Heads up for ldirectord in SLES12 SP5 "Use of uninitialized value $ip_port in pattern match (m//) at /usr/sbin/ldirectord line 1830"

Hi! FYI, here is a copy what I had sent to SUSE support (stating "Because of the very same DNS resolution problem, stopping also failed"; should a temporary DNS resolving problem cause a resource stop to fail and cause node fencing in turn? I don't think so!): --- The problem is the Perl code

[ClusterLabs] Antw: [EXT] cluster log not unambiguous about state of VirtualDomains

>>> "Lentes, Bernd" schrieb am 03.08.2022 um 17:01 in Nachricht <987208047.150503130.1659538882681.javamail.zim...@helmholtz-muenchen.de>: > Hi, > > i have a strange behaviour found in the cluster log > (/var/log/cluster/corosync.log). > I KNOW that i put one node (ha-idg-2) in standby mode and