Re: [ClusterLabs] Pacemaker 1.1.15 - Release Candidate 3

2016-05-27 Thread Jan Pokorný
On 27/05/16 16:21 -0500, Ken Gaillot wrote: > The third release candidate for Pacemaker version 1.1.15 is now > available at: > > https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pacemaker/releases/tag/Pacemaker-1.1.15-rc3 Once gain, to check this release candidate out using Fedora/EPEL builds, there's a COPR

[ClusterLabs] Pacemaker 1.1.15 - Release Candidate 3

2016-05-27 Thread Ken Gaillot
The third release candidate for Pacemaker version 1.1.15 is now available at: https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pacemaker/releases/tag/Pacemaker-1.1.15-rc3 Perhaps the most visible change since 1.1.15-rc2 is that many log messages have been made more user-friendly. Partly this is due to taking

Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: RES: Performance of a mirrored LV (cLVM) with OCFS: Attempt to monitor it

2016-05-27 Thread emmanuel segura
Hi, But the latest lvm version doesn't worries about the aligned? 2016-05-27 18:37 GMT+02:00 Ken Gaillot : > On 05/27/2016 12:58 AM, Ulrich Windl wrote: >> Hi! >> >> Thanks for this info. We actually run the "noop" scheduler for the SAN >> storage (as per menufacturer's

Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: RES: Performance of a mirrored LV (cLVM) with OCFS: Attempt to monitor it

2016-05-27 Thread Ken Gaillot
On 05/27/2016 12:58 AM, Ulrich Windl wrote: > Hi! > > Thanks for this info. We actually run the "noop" scheduler for the SAN > storage (as per menufacturer's recommendation), because on "disk" is actually > spread over up to 40 disks. > Other settings we changes was: > queue/rotational:0 >

Re: [ClusterLabs] crm_attribute bug in 1.1.15-rc1

2016-05-27 Thread Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
Le Mon, 23 May 2016 19:21:23 +0300, Andrey Rogovsky a écrit : > Hi > Any idea why it not work on my cluster? Ok, I think I understood the problem. By default, crm_master use "forever" as lifetime attribute. So my commands were incomplete to get live master score set from

Re: [ClusterLabs] Using pacemaker for manual failover only?

2016-05-27 Thread Klaus Wenninger
On 05/26/2016 08:55 PM, Stephano-Shachter, Dylan wrote: > I tried the location -INFINITY trick and it seems to work quite well. > Thanks for the advice. > > It seems to me that if I am not failing over automatically, then there > is no good reason to run a stonith resource. Is this correct or is