On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Vladislav Bogdanov <bub...@hoster-ok.com> wrote: > 03.10.2011 04:41, Andrew Beekhof wrote: > [...] >>>>> If pacemaker fully finish processing of one membership change - elect >>>>> new DC on a quorate partition, and do not try to take over dc role (or >>>>> release it) on a non-quorate partition if quorate one exists, that >>>>> problem could be gone. >>>> >>>> Non quorate partitions still have a DC. >>>> They're just not supposed to do anything (depending on the value of >>>> no-quorum-policy). >>> >>> I actually meant "do not try to take over dc role in a rejoined cluster >>> (or release that role) if it was running on a non-quorate partition >>> before rejoin if quorate one existed". >> >> All existing DC's give up the role and a new one is elected when two >> partitions join. >> So I'm unsure what you're referring to here :-) >> >>> Sorry for confusion. Not very >>> natural wording again, but should be better. >>> >>> May be DC from non-quorate partition should just have lower priority to >>> become DC when cluster rejoins and new election happen (does it?)? >> >> There is no bias towards past DCs in the election. > > From what I understand, election result highly depends on nodes > (pacemaker processes) uptime. And DC.old has a great chance to win an > election, just because it won it before, and nothing changed in election > parameters after that. Please fix me.
Correct. But its not getting an advantage because it was DC. _______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker