27.11.2014 03:43, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>
>> On 25 Nov 2014, at 10:37 pm, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Is there any information how watchdog integration is intended to work?
>> What are currently-evaluated use-cases for that?
>> It seems to be forcibly disabled id SBD is not detected
> On 25 Nov 2014, at 10:37 pm, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Is there any information how watchdog integration is intended to work?
> What are currently-evaluated use-cases for that?
> It seems to be forcibly disabled id SBD is not detected...
Are you referring to no-quorum-policy=suic
> On 27 Nov 2014, at 2:41 am, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
>
> On 2014-11-25T16:46:01, David Vossel wrote:
>
> Okay, okay, apparently we have got enough topics to discuss. I'll
> grumble a bit more about Brno, but let's get the organisation of that
> thing on track ... Sigh. Always so much work!
- Original Message -
> 26.11.2014 18:36, David Vossel wrote:
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> >> 25.11.2014 23:41, David Vossel wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> - Original Message -
> Hi!
>
> is subj implemented?
>
> Trying echo c > /proc/sysrq-trigger
25.11.2014 12:54, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:...
>
> OK, let's switch tracks a bit. What *topics* do we actually have? Can we
> fill two days? Where would we want to collect them?
>
Just my 2c.
- It would be interesting to get some bird-view information
on what C APIs corosync and pacemaker current
26.11.2014 18:36, David Vossel wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> 25.11.2014 23:41, David Vossel wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
Hi!
is subj implemented?
Trying echo c > /proc/sysrq-trigger on remote nodes and no fencing occurs.
>>>
>>> Yes, fenc
On 11/26/2014 4:41 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2014-11-25T16:46:01, David Vossel wrote:
>
> Okay, okay, apparently we have got enough topics to discuss. I'll
> grumble a bit more about Brno, but let's get the organisation of that
> thing on track ... Sigh. Always so much work!
>
> I'm a
On 2014-11-25T16:46:01, David Vossel wrote:
Okay, okay, apparently we have got enough topics to discuss. I'll
grumble a bit more about Brno, but let's get the organisation of that
thing on track ... Sigh. Always so much work!
I'm assuming arrival on the 3rd and departure on the 6th would be the
- Original Message -
> 25.11.2014 23:41, David Vossel wrote:
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> is subj implemented?
> >>
> >> Trying echo c > /proc/sysrq-trigger on remote nodes and no fencing occurs.
> >
> > Yes, fencing remote-nodes works. Are you certain yo
Am Mittwoch, 26. November 2014, 15:36:55 schrieb Anne Nicolas:
> Le 26/11/2014 13:43, Michael Schwartzkopff a écrit :
> > Am Mittwoch, 26. November 2014, 13:22:53 schrieben Sie:
> >> Le 26/11/2014 13:07, Michael Schwartzkopff a écrit :
> >>> Am Mittwoch, 26. November 2014, 12:54:20 schrieb Anne Nic
I think pacemaker doesn't care about the sbd resource status when it
needs to make a fencing call, that what i think, but i hope some one,
will give me some more information.
Thanks
2014-11-26 15:11 GMT+01:00 Dejan Muhamedagic :
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 11:13:41AM +0100, emmanuel segura wrote:
Le 26/11/2014 13:43, Michael Schwartzkopff a écrit :
Am Mittwoch, 26. November 2014, 13:22:53 schrieben Sie:
Le 26/11/2014 13:07, Michael Schwartzkopff a écrit :
Am Mittwoch, 26. November 2014, 12:54:20 schrieb Anne Nicolas:
Le 26/11/2014 12:23, Michael Schwartzkopff a écrit :
Am Mittwoch, 26
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 11:13:41AM +0100, emmanuel segura wrote:
> But i would like to know if pacemaker needs to start sbd on the node
> where sbd resource isnt running to fence the other nodes, because i
> don't see any start action in the second node:
That's strange. I'd expect that a stonith r
2014-11-26 13:22 GMT+01:00 Keith Ouellette :
> Anne,
>
> Are you expecting the eth0 to actually put in the "down" state like using
> the "ifconfig eth0 down" command? If so the IPaddr2 resource does not do
> that. What that is used for is to configure a second IP address on the NIC
> that can be m
Anne,
Are you expecting the eth0 to actually put in the "down" state like using the
"ifconfig eth0 down" command? If so the IPaddr2 resource does not do that. What
that is used for is to configure a second IP address on the NIC that can be
moved around from "eth0" on each node. Can you clearify
Le 26/11/2014 13:07, Michael Schwartzkopff a écrit :
Am Mittwoch, 26. November 2014, 12:54:20 schrieb Anne Nicolas:
Le 26/11/2014 12:23, Michael Schwartzkopff a écrit :
Am Mittwoch, 26. November 2014, 12:01:36 schrieb Anne Nicolas:
Hi !
I've been using clusterip for a while now without any pr
Am Mittwoch, 26. November 2014, 12:54:20 schrieb Anne Nicolas:
> Le 26/11/2014 12:23, Michael Schwartzkopff a écrit :
> > Am Mittwoch, 26. November 2014, 12:01:36 schrieb Anne Nicolas:
> >> Hi !
> >>
> >> I've been using clusterip for a while now without any problem in
> >> Active/Passive clusters
26.11.2014 14:21, Daniel Dehennin wrote:
> Daniel Dehennin writes:
>
>>> I'll try find how to make the change directly in XML.
>>
>> Ok, looking at git history this feature seems only available on master
>> branch and not yet released.
>
> I do not have that feature on my pacemaker version.
>
>
Le 26/11/2014 12:23, Michael Schwartzkopff a écrit :
Am Mittwoch, 26. November 2014, 12:01:36 schrieb Anne Nicolas:
Hi !
I've been using clusterip for a while now without any problem in
Active/Passive clusters (2 nodes).
Could you please explain, how could you use the ClusterIP in an active/p
Am Mittwoch, 26. November 2014, 12:01:36 schrieb Anne Nicolas:
> Hi !
>
> I've been using clusterip for a while now without any problem in
> Active/Passive clusters (2 nodes).
Could you please explain, how could you use the ClusterIP in an active/passive
cluster? ClusterIP ist for the use in an
Daniel Dehennin writes:
>> I'll try find how to make the change directly in XML.
>
> Ok, looking at git history this feature seems only available on master
> branch and not yet released.
I do not have that feature on my pacemaker version.
Does it sounds normal, I have:
- asymmetrical Opt-in cl
Hi !
I've been using clusterip for a while now without any problem in
Active/Passive clusters (2 nodes). On my last install, I'm facing quite
an annoying probem. Despite the same configuration for clusterip I've
ever used, , the interface is now up on both nodes which ends with an IP
conflict
But i would like to know if pacemaker needs to start sbd on the node
where sbd resource isnt running to fence the other nodes, because i
don't see any start action in the second node:
::
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 04:20:32PM +0100, emmanuel segura wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> The last night, i had a cluster in fencing race using sbd as stonith
Can you give a bit more details.
> device, i would like to know what is the effect to use start-delay in
> my stonith resource in this way:
>
24 matches
Mail list logo
