On 09/06/2016 10:20 AM, Dan Swartzendruber wrote: > On 2016-09-06 10:59, Ken Gaillot wrote: > > [snip] > >> I thought power-wait was intended for this situation, where the node's >> power supply can survive a brief outage, so a delay is needed to ensure >> it drains. In any case, I know people are using it for that. >> >> Are there any drawbacks to using power-wait for this purpose, even if >> that wasn't its original intent? Is it just that the "on" will get the >> delay as well? > > I can't speak to the first part of your question, but for me the second > part is a definite YES. The issue is that I want a long enough delay to > be sure the host is D E A D and not writing to the pool anymore; but > that delay is now multiplied by 2, and if it gets "too long", vsphere > guests can start getting disk I/O errors...
Ah, Marek's suggestions are the best way out, then. Fence agents are usually simple shell scripts, so adding a power-wait-off option shouldn't be difficult. >>> *) Configure fence device to not use reboot but OFF, ON >>> Very same to the situation when there are multiple power circuits; you >>> have to switch them all OFF and afterwards turn them ON. >> >> FYI, no special configuration is needed for this with recent pacemaker >> versions. If multiple devices are listed in a topology level, pacemaker >> will automatically convert reboot requests into all-off-then-all-on. > > My understanding was that applied to 1.1.14? My CentOS 7 host has > pacemaker 1.1.13 :( Correct -- but most OS distributions, including CentOS, backport specific bugfixes and features from later versions. In this case, as long as you've applied updates (pacemaker-1.1.13-10 or later), you've got it. _______________________________________________ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org