On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 10:14 PM, Lars Ellenberg
lars.ellenb...@linbit.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:43:27AM +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
I am missing the state: running degraded or suboptimal.
Yep, degraded is not a state available for pacemaker.
Pacemaker cannot do much about
Am 04.04.2011 22:14, schrieb Lars Ellenberg:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:43:27AM +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
I am missing the state: running degraded or suboptimal.
Yep, degraded is not a state available for pacemaker.
Pacemaker cannot do much about suboptimal.
Maybe we need to add
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 09:17:14AM +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 10:14 PM, Lars Ellenberg
lars.ellenb...@linbit.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:43:27AM +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
I am missing the state: running degraded or suboptimal.
Yep, degraded is not
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 09:42:43AM +0200, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Am 04.04.2011 22:14, schrieb Lars Ellenberg:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:43:27AM +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
I am missing the state: running degraded or suboptimal.
Yep, degraded is not a state available for pacemaker.
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Christoph Bartoschek
bartosc...@or.uni-bonn.de wrote:
Am 04.04.2011 22:14, schrieb Lars Ellenberg:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:43:27AM +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
I am missing the state: running degraded or suboptimal.
Yep, degraded is not a state available for
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 09:17:14AM +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 10:14 PM, Lars Ellenberg
lars.ellenb...@linbit.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:43:27AM +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
I am missing the state: running degraded or suboptimal.
Yep,
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Christoph Bartoschek
bartosc...@or.uni-bonn.de wrote:
Am 01.04.2011 16:38, schrieb Lars Ellenberg:
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 11:35:19AM +0200, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Am 01.04.2011 11:27, schrieb Florian Haas:
On 2011-04-01 10:49, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 09:43:27AM +0200, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
I am missing the state: running degraded or suboptimal.
Yep, degraded is not a state available for pacemaker.
Pacemaker cannot do much about suboptimal.
Maybe we need to add OCF_RUNNING_BUT_DEGRADED to the OCF spec (and the
On 4/2/2011 12:40 AM, Vadym Chepkov wrote:
Ok, lets see how this might work.
You would need a separate monitor for the cluster and since this
monitor also can potentially crash, you would need another monitor to
observer the first one, then we would want the first one to monitor
second one,
On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Dimitri Maziuk dmaz...@bmrb.wisc.edu wrote:
On 4/2/2011 12:40 AM, Vadym Chepkov wrote:
Ok, lets see how this might work.
You would need a separate monitor for the cluster and since this
monitor also can potentially crash, you would need another monitor to
Am 01.04.2011 10:27, schrieb Andrew Beekhof:
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:10 AM, Lars Ellenberg
lars.ellenb...@linbit.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 06:18:07PM +0100, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Hi,
we experiment with DRBD and pacemaker and see several times that the
DRBD part is
On 2011-04-01 10:49, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Am 01.04.2011 10:27, schrieb Andrew Beekhof:
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:10 AM, Lars Ellenberg
lars.ellenb...@linbit.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 06:18:07PM +0100, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
I am missing the state: running degraded or
Am 01.04.2011 11:27, schrieb Florian Haas:
On 2011-04-01 10:49, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Am 01.04.2011 10:27, schrieb Andrew Beekhof:
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:10 AM, Lars Ellenberg
lars.ellenb...@linbit.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 06:18:07PM +0100, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
I
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 11:35:19AM +0200, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Am 01.04.2011 11:27, schrieb Florian Haas:
On 2011-04-01 10:49, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Am 01.04.2011 10:27, schrieb Andrew Beekhof:
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:10 AM, Lars Ellenberg
lars.ellenb...@linbit.com
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 8:38 AM, Lars Ellenberg
lars.ellenb...@linbit.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 11:35:19AM +0200, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Am 01.04.2011 11:27, schrieb Florian Haas:
On 2011-04-01 10:49, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Am 01.04.2011 10:27, schrieb Andrew Beekhof:
On
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Lars Ellenberg
lars.ellenb...@linbit.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 11:35:19AM +0200, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Am 01.04.2011 11:27, schrieb Florian Haas:
On 2011-04-01 10:49, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Am 01.04.2011 10:27, schrieb Andrew Beekhof:
On
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net wrote:
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Lars Ellenberg
lars.ellenb...@linbit.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 11:35:19AM +0200, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Am 01.04.2011 11:27, schrieb Florian Haas:
On 2011-04-01 10:49,
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 08:42:04AM -0600, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 8:38 AM, Lars Ellenberg
lars.ellenb...@linbit.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 11:35:19AM +0200, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Am 01.04.2011 11:27, schrieb Florian Haas:
On 2011-04-01 10:49, Christoph
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net wrote:
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Serge Dubrouski serge...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net wrote:
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Lars Ellenberg
lars.ellenb...@linbit.com
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Lars Ellenberg
lars.ellenb...@linbit.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 08:42:04AM -0600, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 8:38 AM, Lars Ellenberg
lars.ellenb...@linbit.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 11:35:19AM +0200, Christoph Bartoschek
Serge Dubrouski wrote:
The primary point so far is that current situation is unacceptable for
most of customers.
I'd just like to point out that current situation is unacceptable to the
*3 users* *who complained so far*.
If you don't get it, google for faulty generalization. And look up
Though the previous discussion was beneficial to all the readers, my
conclusion is that if there were a document or preferably a picture
(pictures worth a 1000 words) of the boundaries of each of the components
(All of them, not just some. In this case DRDB and pacemaker. But in other
threads
Am 01.04.2011 16:38, schrieb Lars Ellenberg:
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 11:35:19AM +0200, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Am 01.04.2011 11:27, schrieb Florian Haas:
On 2011-04-01 10:49, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Am 01.04.2011 10:27, schrieb Andrew Beekhof:
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:10 AM, Lars
On Apr 1, 2011, at 10:56 AM, Lars Ellenberg wrote:
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 08:42:04AM -0600, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 8:38 AM, Lars Ellenberg
lars.ellenb...@linbit.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 11:35:19AM +0200, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Am 01.04.2011 11:27,
On Apr 2, 2011, at 12:30 AM, Vadym Chepkov wrote:
Of course you can patch pacemaker to detect that the RAID1 is degraded,
and trigger faxing a PO to your supplier for a replacement drive.
Pacemaker doesn't have RAID1 RA, does it?
It's was a jest, of cause, but still, I guess it's a
Am 26.03.2011 00:10, schrieb Lars Ellenberg:
...
Yep, degraded is not a state available for pacemaker.
Pacemaker cannot do much about suboptimal.
Pacemaker can stop, start, and promote/demote resources.
No more, no less.
If your resources are running suboptimal (but working),
Hi,
we experiment with DRBD and pacemaker and see several times that the
DRBD part is degraded (One node is outdated or diskless or something
similar) but crm_mon just reports that the DRBD resource runs as master
and slave on the nodes.
There is no indication that the resource is not in its
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 06:18:07PM +0100, Christoph Bartoschek wrote:
Hi,
we experiment with DRBD and pacemaker and see several times that the
DRBD part is degraded (One node is outdated or diskless or something
similar) but crm_mon just reports that the DRBD resource runs as master
and
28 matches
Mail list logo
