On Fri, 2 Oct 2020 15:18:18 +0300 Олег Самойлов <spl...@ya.ru> wrote:
> > On 29 Sep 2020, at 11:34, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <j...@dalibo.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > Vagrant use virtualbox by default, which supports softdog, but it support > > many other virtualization plateform, including eg. libvirt/kvm where you > > can use virtualized watchdog card. > > > >> > > > > Vagrant can use Chef, Ansible, Salt, puppet, and others to provision VM: > > > > https://www.vagrantup.com/docs/provisioning > > > > > > There many many available vagrant images: > > https://app.vagrantup.com/boxes/search There's many vagrant image...because > > building vagrant image is easy. I built some when RH8 wasn't available yet. > > So if you need special box, with eg. some predefined setup, you can do it > > quite fast. > > My english is poor, I'll try to find other words. My primary and main task > was to create a prototype for an automatic deploy system. So I used only the > same technique that will be used on the real hardware servers: RedHat dvd > image + kickstart. And to test such deploying too. That's why I do not use > any special image for virtual machines. How exactly using a vagrant box you built yourself is different with virtualbox where you clone (I suppose) an existing VM you built? > > Watchdog is kind of a self-fencing method. Cluster with quorum+watchdog, or > > SBD+watchdog or quorum+SBD+watchdog are fine...without "active" fencing. > > quorum+watchdog or SBD+watchdog are useless. Quorum+SBD+watchdog is a > solution, but also has some drawback, so this is not perfect or fine yet. Well, by "SBD", I meant "Storage Based Death": using a shared storage to poison pill other nodes. Not just the sbd daemon, that is used for SBD and watchdog. Sorry for the shortcut and the confusion. > I'll write about it below. > > >>> Now, in regard with your multi-site clusters and how you deal with it > >>> using quorum, did you read the chapter about the Cluster Ticket Registry > >>> in Pacemaker doc ? See: > >>> > >>> https://clusterlabs.org/pacemaker/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/2.0/html/Pacemaker_Explained/ch15.html > >>> > >> > >> Yep, I read the whole documentation two years ago. Yep, the ticket system > >> was looked interesting at first glance, but I didn't see a method how to > >> use it with PAF. :) > > > > It could be interesting to have detailed feedback about that. Could you > > share your experience? > > Heh, I don't have experience of using the ticket system because I can't even > imaging how to use the ticket system with PAF. OK > As about pacemaker without STONITH the idea was simple: quorum + SBD as > watchdog daemon. (this was what I describe as "quorum+watchdog", again sorry for the confusion :)) > More precisely described in the README. Proved by my test > system this is mostly works. :) > > What are possible caveats. First of all softdog is not good for this (only > for testing), and system will heavily depend on reliability of the watchdog > device. +1 > SBD is not good as watchdog daemon. In my version it does not check > that the corosync and any processes of the pacemaker are not frozen (for > instance by kill -STOP). Looked like checking for corosync have been already > done: https://github.com/ClusterLabs/sbd/pull/83 Good. > Don't know what about checking all processes of the pacemaker. This moves toward the good direction I would say: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/users/2020-August/027602.html The main Pacemaker process is now checked by sbd. Maybe other processes will be included in futur releases as "more in-depth health checks" as written in this email. Regards, _______________________________________________ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/