Hi Andrew,
> > Okay.
> > I wish this problem is revised by the next release.
>
> crm_report?
I confirmed a problem again in PM1.2-rc1 and registered in Bugzilla.
* http://bugs.clusterlabs.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5212
Towards Bugzilla, I attached the crm_report file.
Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauchi.
On 9 May 2014, at 2:05 pm, renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Thank you for comment.
>
>>> Is it responsibility of the resource agent side to prevent a state of these
>>> plural Master?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> In this scenario, no nodes have quorum and therefor no additional instance
Hi Andrew,
Thank you for comment.
> > Is it responsibility of the resource agent side to prevent a state of these
> > plural Master?
>
> No.
>
> In this scenario, no nodes have quorum and therefor no additional instances
> should have been promoted. Thats the definition of "freeze" :)
> Even
On 8 May 2014, at 1:37 pm, renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I composed Master/Slave resource of three nodes that set
> quorum-policy="freeze".
> (I use Stateful in Master/Slave resource.)
>
> -
> Current DC: srv01 (3232238280) - partition with quo
Hi Emmanuel,
> Why are you using ssh as stonith? i don't think the fencing is working
> because your nodes are in unclean state
No, STONITH is not carried out because all nodes lose quorum.
This is right movement of Pacemaker.
It is an example to use STONITH of ssh.
Best Regards,
Hideo Yamauch
Why are you using ssh as stonith? i don't think the fencing is working
because your nodes are in unclean state
2014-05-08 5:37 GMT+02:00 :
> Hi All,
>
> I composed Master/Slave resource of three nodes that set
> quorum-policy="freeze".
> (I use Stateful in Master/Slave resource.)
>
> ---
Hi All,
I composed Master/Slave resource of three nodes that set quorum-policy="freeze".
(I use Stateful in Master/Slave resource.)
-
Current DC: srv01 (3232238280) - partition with quorum
Version: 1.1.11-830af67
3 Nodes configured
9 Resources configured
Online:
