On 2008-08-28T12:46:57, Christian Wörns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You are definitely right, all should be redundant and it is. We are > using an UPS, but I have seen some UPS tested well monthly and they > crashed on a real power crash. > > Is it possible to define a timeout? If "nodeB" can not STONITH "nodeA" > for maybe 5 minutes, the risk to have a split brain would be > calculateable.
Not with the network power switches. All you would know is that _you_ were unable to reach the fencing device, which just as well might imply that _you_ have the problem, and not the remote node. I just "finished" (ie, it compiles and passes basic testing ;-) a shared-storage fencing mechanism though, which might be of interest to you: http://wiki.linux-ha.org/SBD_Fencing ? Please let me know if the "documentation" makes sense to you. ;-) Regards, Lars -- Teamlead Kernel, SuSE Labs, Research and Development SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) "Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
