On 07/04/2013, at 2:17 AM, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I found that it is now (cb7b3f4) possible to add meta attributes with
> any names and values to any resource definition. IIRC I failed to do
> that year ago or so. So, is it a bug or a feature?
Thats always been possible AFAIK
___
Looks like pacemaker is already running.
How are you try to start pacemaker?
On 06/04/2013, at 12:00 AM, Andreas wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am running a few clusters with CentOS 6.3 - heartbeat 3.0.4 - pacemaker
> 1.1.7 fine.
>
> Now I failed to to upgrade to CentOS 6.4 and pacemaker 1.1.8 and gettin
On 05/04/2013, at 3:21 PM, Kazunori INOUE wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When fencing failed (*1) on the following conditions, an error occurs
> in stonith_perform_callback().
>
> - using fencing-topology. (*2)
> - fence DC node. ($ crm node fence dev2)
>
> Apr 3 17:04:47 dev2 stonith-ng[2278]: notice:
The resource agent is broken. Specifically it does not correctly handle
"stopping a stopped service" according to the LSB spec.
http://clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1-crmsh/html/Pacemaker_Explained/ap-lsb.html
On 05/04/2013, at 2:37 AM, Yann Fouillat
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MES
This is using corosync 2.0?
On 04/04/2013, at 9:55 PM, Junko IKEDA wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I run the latest pacemaker + corosync, and check some case-insensitive
> behaviors.
> Hostname should be handled in a case-insensitive manner,
> and there might be the following pattern.
>
> example;
> hostna
On 03/04/2013, at 9:15 PM, Oriol Mula-Valls wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've started with Linux HA about one year ago. Currently I'm facing a new
> project in which I have to set up two nodes with high available virtual
> machines. I have used as a starting point the Digimer's tutorial
> (https://altee
On 29/03/2013, at 6:03 PM, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
> 29.03.2013 03:31, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 4:12 AM, Benjamin Kiessling
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> we've got a small pacemaker cluster running which controls an
>>> active/passive router. On this cluster we've got a s
On 19/03/2013, at 9:08 AM, David Coulson wrote:
>
> On 3/18/13 5:24 PM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> So:
>>
>> 1. the IP moved from 01 to 02
>> 2. 01 was then rebooted
>> 3. a long time passes
>> 4. 01 starts arping for the IP
>>
>> Is that what you're saying?
>> Is the problem transient or does
I'm not 100% sure what the best approach is here.
Traditionally this is done with resource agents (ie. ClusterMon or ping) which
update attrd.
We could potentially build it into attrd directly, but then we'd need to think
about how to turn it on/off.
I think I'd lean towards a new agent+daemon
On 03/04/2013, at 6:40 PM, Daniel Black wrote:
> I'm getting this repetition of messages every 5 seconds. Is this normal?
No. This is indicative of core Corosync (not the pacemaker bits) not being very
happy.
What version are you running?
> crm_mon is showing 5 members as constant.
>
> Apr
On 01/04/2013, at 7:32 PM, Kazunori INOUE wrote:
> (13.03.27 18:01), Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Kazunori INOUE
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I'm using pacemaker-1.1 (c7910371a5. the latest devel).
>>>
>>> In the case of globally-unique="false", instance numbers are
On 04/04/2013, at 9:48 PM, Junko IKEDA wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any change in "crm resource reprobe"?
Not intentionally.
Does the underlying crm_resource command still work?
> It doesn't work with pacemaker + corosync.
>
>
> [root@GUEST03 ~]# crm_mon -1 -Af
> Last updated: Thu Apr 4 17:54
On 29/03/2013, at 11:06 PM, Rainer Brestan wrote:
> Puh, i haven´t thought the discussion became this direction.
>
> Corosync is not the only software, which need shared memory, so it is part of
> the OS startup to provide it, not part of Corosync or Pacemaker.
> And yes, it is too late to mo
On 28/03/2013, at 3:29 AM, Charles Mean wrote:
> Hello there,
>
> I am running heartbeat(1.3.0) + pacemaker(1.0.9)(default Debian packages)
> into and active/active cluster for a load balancer with Nginx.
> So I have the VIP over two Nginx instances(two nodes) that provide the load
> balancer
On 27/03/2013, at 7:45 PM, Kazunori INOUE wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm using pacemaker-1.1 (c7910371a5. the latest devel).
>
> When fencing failed 10 times, S_TRANSITION_ENGINE state is kept.
> (related: https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pacemaker/commit/e29d2f9)
>
> How should I recover? what kind of
On 13/03/2013, at 5:14 PM, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
> 13.03.2013 03:46, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Vladislav Bogdanov
>> wrote:
>>> 12.03.2013 04:44, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Vladislav Bogdanov
wrote:
> 07.03.2013 03:3
On 15/03/2013, at 11:29 AM, Leon Fauster wrote:
> Am 04.03.2013 um 18:20 schrieb Leon Fauster :
>> okay - recap:
>>
>> 1st. i have this delay where the two nodes dont see each
>> other (after rebooting) and the result are resources running on both
>> nodes while they should only run on one n
On 05/04/2013, at 3:24 AM, Jerome BRUSQ wrote:
> Hi all,
> I’m starting using Pacemaker and Corosync, and I find it very nice, it’s a
> very good tool !
>
> I have create a cluster (2 nodes), and pacemaker monitors a group of 3
> resources :
> - a custom service (lsb script), that starts
08.04.2013 04:52, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>
> On 07/04/2013, at 2:17 AM, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I found that it is now (cb7b3f4) possible to add meta attributes with
>> any names and values to any resource definition. IIRC I failed to do
>> that year ago or so. So, is it a bug or
Just catching up on things post-eather... is this still an issue for you?
If so, can you turn on tracing for the cib (and client) processes and attach
the resulting logs?
On 23/03/2013, at 11:09 PM, matonb wrote:
> matonb writes:
>
> The cluster has been up for about 15mins, still getting th
On 22/03/2013, at 3:17 PM, renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Thank you for comments.
>
> We demand time and the same movement that appointed ordered=false of the
> group resource.
>
> * Case 0 - group : orderded=false
> * At the time of orderded=false, it takes start of vip-
On 02/04/2013, at 10:22 PM, Andrei Belov wrote:
>
> Previously, libcrmservice always has OCF_ROOT_DIR defined as "/usr/lib/ocf",
> despite the fact that another path was defined in glue_config.h.
>
> Caught on SunOS 5.11 while configuring cluster-glue and pacemaker using
> non-standard prefix.
On 03/04/2013, at 4:07 AM, Charles Mean wrote:
> Hello guys,
>
> I am running corosync 1.4.2 and pacemaker 1.1.7 on Debian environments trying
> to deploy an active/active cluster with two nodes.
> The main problem is that I have two resources that depend on each other, so I
> have the VIP cl
Hi Andrew,
Thank you for comments.
> > Using ordering_set and colocation_set, is it impossible to perform movement
> > same as "ordered=false" of the group resource?
>
> Yes, because they're not the same thing.
>
> Setting "sequential=false" is not at all like setting "ordered=false".
> Settin
On 08/04/2013, at 2:52 PM, renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Thank you for comments.
>
>>> Using ordering_set and colocation_set, is it impossible to perform movement
>>> same as "ordered=false" of the group resource?
>>
>> Yes, because they're not the same thing.
>>
>> Sett
- Original Message -
> On 03/04/2013, at 6:40 PM, Daniel Black
> wrote:
>
> > I'm getting this repetition of messages every 5 seconds. Is this
> > normal?
>
> No. This is indicative of core Corosync (not the pacemaker bits) not
> being very happy.
> What version are you running?
/usr
Hi Andrew,
Thank you for comments.
> >>> Using ordering_set and colocation_set, is it impossible to perform
> >>> movement same as "ordered=false" of the group resource?
> >>
> >> Yes, because they're not the same thing.
> >>
> >> Setting "sequential=false" is not at all like setting "ordered=
On 08/04/2013, at 4:06 PM, Daniel Black wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> On 03/04/2013, at 6:40 PM, Daniel Black
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm getting this repetition of messages every 5 seconds. Is this
>>> normal?
>>
>> No. This is indicative of core Corosync (not the pacemaker bits) n
On 08/04/2013, at 4:11 PM, renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Thank you for comments.
>
> Using ordering_set and colocation_set, is it impossible to perform
> movement same as "ordered=false" of the group resource?
Yes, because they're not the same thing.
>>>
Hi Andrew,
Thank you for comments.
> Oh!
> I somehow failed to recognise that you were using 1.0
> There is a reasonable chance that 1.1 behaves better in this regard.
>
> I also notice, now, that the resources are still in a group - deleting the
> ordering constraint achieves nothing if the re
30 matches
Mail list logo
