On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 09:05:19AM +0200, Joel Colledge wrote:
>
> I meant just put Pacemaker in maintenance mode and do the rest
> manually. So no "pcs cluster standby". Perhaps "pcs resource disable"
> would be a better solution. In any case, you need to make sure DRBD is
> not being used on eit
On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 01:58:24PM +0200, Joel Colledge wrote:
> > So, maybe this is a question for the Pacemaker mailing list, but what
> > did I do wrong here? When adding a second volume to a resource, what is
> > the proper way to change its state from Inconsistent to UpToDate?
>
> I would sa
We have a DRBD replication between two storage servers, using
Protocol C. I needed to expand this and add a new DRBD device
to our resource. The primary/secondary server state is controlled
by Pacemaker.
So, last Wednesday, I added a second volume to our DRBD resource.
Then, I created the drbd met
I have a working DRBD system, with DRBD 9.0 where a block device
(/dev/sda5) is being replicated between two storage servers.
Now, I've added a second block device (/dev/sdb1) to each of these
storage servers. In my r0.res, I have, amongst other configurations:
on storage1 {
: drbd r0: helper command: /sbin/drbdadm
fence-peer r0 exit code 4 (0x400)
Jan 11 08:49:53 storage2 kernel: drbd r0: fence-peer helper returned 4
(peer was fenced)
But the switch ports connected to the fenced node are still enabled.
What am I missing here?
Thanks!
Bryan Walton
--
Bryan K.
Hi,
I've building an HA cluster with two storage nodes. The two nodes are
running DRBD 9 on CentOS 7. Storage1 is primary and storage2 is
secondary.
The two nodes do their DRBD replication over a bonded, directly cabled
connection. Upstream, both storage nodes are connected to two Brocade
ICX-74
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 10:20:23AM +0100, Robert Altnoeder wrote:
> >> Is the above quote stating that if Pacemaker can't confirm that one
> >> node has been STONITHed, that it won't allow the remaining node to work,
> >> either?
>
> At least in the default configuration, if fencing fails, the clu
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 12:58:49PM +1100, Igor Cicimov wrote:
> > I don't understand this. If the power fails to a node, then won't the
> > node, by definition be down (since there is no power going to the node)?
> > So, how then could there be a split brain when one node has no power?
>
> And ho
I have a two-node DRBD 9 resource configured in Primary-Secondary mode
with automatic failover configured with Pacemaker.
I know that I need to configure STONITH in Pacemaker and then set DRBD's
fencing to "resource-and-stonith".
The nodes are Supermicro servers with IPMI. I'm planning to use IP
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 04:47:53PM +1100, Adi Pircalabu wrote:
>
> Why aren't you using Ethernet bonding?
Thanks Adi,
We are rethinking our network configuration. We may do our replication
through a directly cabled and bonded connection, and bypass our
switches. This would simplify our drbd co
Hi,
I'm trying to configure a two-node cluster, where each node has
dedicated redundant nics:
storage node 1 has two private IPs:
10.40.1.3
10.40.2.2
storage node 2 has two private IPs:
10.40.1.2
10.40.2.3
I'd like to configure the resource so that the nodes have two possible
paths to the other
11 matches
Mail list logo
