> It is not.
>
> Pacemaker may just be quicker to promote now,
> or in your setup other things may have changed
> which also changed the timing behaviour.
>
> But what you are trying to do has always been broken,
> and will always be broken.
>
Hello Lars,
You were right, fixing configuration i
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 04:23:51PM +0200, Nikola Ciprich wrote:
> Hello Lars,
>
> thanks for Your reply..
>
> > You "Problem" is this:
> >
> > DRBD config:
> >allow-two-primaries,
> >but *NO* fencing policy,
> >and *NO* fencing handler.
> >
> > And, a
Hello Lars,
thanks for Your reply..
> You "Problem" is this:
>
> DRBD config:
> allow-two-primaries,
> but *NO* fencing policy,
> and *NO* fencing handler.
>
> And, as if that was not bad enough already,
> Pacemaker config:
>
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 11:38:52AM +0200, Nikola Ciprich wrote:
> > Well, I'd expect that to be safer as your current configuration ...
> > discard-zero-changes will never overwrite data automatically have
> > you tried adding the start-delay to DRBD start operation? I'm curious if
> > that is
> Well, I'd expect that to be safer as your current configuration ...
> discard-zero-changes will never overwrite data automatically have
> you tried adding the start-delay to DRBD start operation? I'm curious if
> that is already sufficient for your problem.
Hi,
tried
(I hope it's the sett
On 07/11/2012 09:23 AM, Nikola Ciprich wrote:
>>> It really really looks like Pacemaker is too fast when promoting to
>>> primary ... before the connection to the already up second node can be
>>> established.
>>
>> Do you mean we're violating a constraint?
>> Or is it a problem of the RA returning
On 07/11/2012 04:50 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Andreas Kurz wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Nikola Ciprich
>> wrote:
>>> Hello Andreas,
Why not using the RA that comes with the resource-agent package?
>>> well, I've historically used my scripts, h
> > It really really looks like Pacemaker is too fast when promoting to
> > primary ... before the connection to the already up second node can be
> > established.
>
> Do you mean we're violating a constraint?
> Or is it a problem of the RA returning too soon?
dunno, I tried older drbd userspaces
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Andreas Kurz wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Nikola Ciprich
> wrote:
>> Hello Andreas,
>>> Why not using the RA that comes with the resource-agent package?
>> well, I've historically used my scripts, haven't even noticed when LVM
>> resource appeared.. I
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Nikola Ciprich
wrote:
> Hello Andreas,
>> Why not using the RA that comes with the resource-agent package?
> well, I've historically used my scripts, haven't even noticed when LVM
> resource appeared.. I switched to it now.., thanks for the hint..
>> this "become-p
Hello Andreas,
> Why not using the RA that comes with the resource-agent package?
well, I've historically used my scripts, haven't even noticed when LVM
resource appeared.. I switched to it now.., thanks for the hint..
> this "become-primary-on" was never activated?
nope.
> Is the drbd init scrip
On 07/09/2012 12:58 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote:
> Hello Andreas,
>
> yes, You're right. I should have sent those in the initial post. Sorry about
> that.
> I've created very simple test configuration on which I'm able to simulate the
> problem.
> there's no stonith etc, since it's just two virtual
Hello Andreas,
yes, You're right. I should have sent those in the initial post. Sorry about
that.
I've created very simple test configuration on which I'm able to simulate the
problem.
there's no stonith etc, since it's just two virtual machines for the test.
crm conf:
primitive drbd-sas0 ocf:
On 07/02/2012 11:49 PM, Nikola Ciprich wrote:
> hello,
>
> I'm trying to solve quite mysterious problem here..
> I've got new cluster with bunch of SAS disks for testing purposes.
> I've configured DRBDs (in primary/primary configuration)
>
> when I start drbd using drbdadm, it get's up nicely (b
14 matches
Mail list logo
