On Sat, 5 Nov 2022 20:53:09 +0100 Valentin Vidić via Users <users@clusterlabs.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 05, 2022 at 06:47:59PM +0000, Robert Hayden wrote: > > That was my impression as well...so I may have something wrong. My > > expectation was that SBD daemon should be writing to the /dev/watchdog > > within 20 seconds and the kernel watchdog would self fence. > > I don't see anything unusual in the config except that pacemaker mode is > also enabled. This means that the cluster is providing signal for sbd even > when the storage device is down, for example: > > 883 ? SL 0:00 sbd: inquisitor > 892 ? SL 0:00 \_ sbd: watcher: /dev/vdb1 - slot: 0 - uuid: ... > 893 ? SL 0:00 \_ sbd: watcher: Pacemaker > 894 ? SL 0:00 \_ sbd: watcher: Cluster > > You can strace different sbd processes to see what they are doing at any > point. I suspect both watchers should detect the loss of network/communication with the other node. BUT, when sbd is in Pacemaker mode, it doesn't reset the node if the local **Pacemaker** is still quorate (via corosync). See the full chapter: «If Pacemaker integration is activated, SBD will not self-fence if **device** majority is lost [...]» https://documentation.suse.com/sle-ha/15-SP4/html/SLE-HA-all/cha-ha-storage-protect.html Would it be possible that no node is shutting down because the cluster is in two-node mode? Because of this mode, both would keep the quorum expecting the fencing to kill the other one... Except there's no active fencing here, only "self-fencing". To verify this guess, check the corosync conf for the "two_node" parameter and if both nodes still report as quorate during network outage using: corosync-quorumtool -s If this turn to be a good guess, without **active** fencing, I suppose a cluster can not rely on the two-node mode. I'm not sure what would be the best setup though. Regards, _______________________________________________ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/