Re: [ClusterLabs] [Patch][glue][external/libvirt] Conversion to a lower case of hostlist.

Hi Hideo-san, On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 05:28:05PM +0900, renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp wrote: > Hi All, > > We intend to change some patches. > We withdraw this patch. I suppose that you'll send another one? I can vaguelly recall a problem with non-lower case node names, but not the specifics. Is

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello Christine, > I think it's worth mentioning here that corosync already sets its > packets to TC_INTERACTIVE (which DLM does not), so they should not need > too much messing around with in iptables/qdisc If that is the case, then why do the

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

On 14/09/15 12:45, Noel Kuntze wrote: > > Hello Christine, > >> I think it's worth mentioning here that corosync already sets its >> packets to TC_INTERACTIVE (which DLM does not), so they should not need >> too much messing around with in iptables/qdisc > > If that is the case, then why do the

[ClusterLabs] Antw: Manage rate of resource migration

>>> Matthew Vernon schrieb am 14.09.2015 um 13:31 in Nachricht <55f6b017.7070...@cam.ac.uk>: > Hi, > > I have a pacemaker/corosync cluster where the resources are all Xen > guests. Pacemaker automatically distributes these between my two Xen > hosts, and this is great. > > When

Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello Ullrich, > Then that's not FIFO, but priority scheduling. Eveybody knows the starvation > problem of priotity scheduling. It's mixed. The individual bands behave like a FIFO. The bands are prioritized over each other. > Imagine some

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello Christine, I googled a bit and some doc[1] says that TC_PRIO_INTERACTIVE maps to value 6, whatever that is. Assuming that value of 6 is the same as the "priority value", Corosync traffic should go into band 0, because TOS values of 0x10

Re: [ClusterLabs] node dead timeout

Hello Dejan, thanks for your answer! OK, I see.. I'm using cman, so I guess it's option. I'm not sure whether I understand RH docs on this correctly, do I need to stop/start whole cluster for this option to apply? Or even better, is there a way how can I check currently set value? with best

[ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: Antw: Re: EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

>>> Noel Kuntze schrieb am 14.09.2015 um 13:55 in Nachricht <55f6b5b5.8020...@familie-kuntze.de>: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Hello Ullrich, > >> Actually I don't understand that claim: If packets are delivered in order >>(mostly), any TOTEM

Re: [ClusterLabs] node dead timeout

Hi, On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 09:15:59AM +0200, Nikola Ciprich wrote: > Hello Andrew and all pacemaker users and developers, > > I'd like to ask for advice - reading the docs, I'm still not sure - how > can I set timeout telling when is node considered dead (and fenced)? > > Is it dc-deadtime ?

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello Christine, Do you have a pointer for me where to look in the source? Searching for TC_INTERACTIVE in the Corosync sources on Github yielded no results. How the scheduler handles the packets depends on the settings and type of it, so yes,

Re: [ClusterLabs] Adding 'virsh migrate migrate-setspeed' support to the vm RA

On 14/09/15 07:19 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote: > Hi Digimer, > > On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 03:36:09AM -0400, Digimer wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I hit an issue a little while ago where live-migrating a VM (on the >> same management network normally used for corosync and a few other >> monitoring

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

On 14/09/15 10:46 AM, Noel Kuntze wrote: > > Hello Christine, > > I googled a bit and some doc[1] says that TC_PRIO_INTERACTIVE maps to value > 6, whatever that is. > Assuming that value of 6 is the same as the "priority value", Corosync > traffic should go into band 0, because > TOS values of

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

On 14/09/15 04:20 AM, Jan Friesse wrote: > Digimer napsal(a): >> Hi all, >> >>Starting a new thread from the "Clustered LVM with iptables issue" >> thread... >> >>I've decided to review how I do networking entirely in my cluster. I >> make zero claims to being great at networks, so I would

Re: [ClusterLabs] Parser error with fence_ipmilan

> On 14 Sep 2015, at 7:48 pm, dan wrote: > > mån 2015-09-14 klockan 10:02 +0200 skrev dan: >> Hi >> >> To see if my cluster problem go away with a newer version of pacemaker I >> have now installed pcemaker 1.1.12+git+a9c8177-3ubuntu1 and I had to get >> 4.0.19-1

Re: [ClusterLabs] EL6, cman, rrp, unicast and iptables

Digimer napsal(a): Hi all, Starting a new thread from the "Clustered LVM with iptables issue" thread... I've decided to review how I do networking entirely in my cluster. I make zero claims to being great at networks, so I would love some feedback. I've got three active/passive

Re: [ClusterLabs] Parser error with fence_ipmilan

mån 2015-09-14 klockan 10:02 +0200 skrev dan: > Hi > > To see if my cluster problem go away with a newer version of pacemaker I > have now installed pcemaker 1.1.12+git+a9c8177-3ubuntu1 and I had to get > 4.0.19-1 (ubuntu) of fence-agents to get a working fence-ipmilan. > > But now when the