Thanks for your reply Andrei. There is no external monitoring software running.
The logs that I posted are from the pacemaker log with debug enabled. The Linux
hostname of the node is "ctr_qemu", but the Pacemaker name is "primary". It is
actually the same node.
I've just run the same test
On Mon, 2019-06-24 at 14:45 -0500, Bryan K. Walton wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 12:02:59PM -0500, Ken Gaillot wrote:
> > > Jun 20 11:48:36 storage1 crmd[240695]: notice: Transition 1
> > > (Complete=12, Pending=0, Fired=0, Skipped=0, Incomplete=0,
> > >
On Tue, 2019-06-25 at 11:06 +, Somanath Jeeva wrote:
> I have not configured fencing in our setup . However I would like to
> know if the split brain can be avoided when high CPU occurs.
Fencing *is* the way to prevent split brain. If the nodes can't see
each other, one will power down the
Hi All,
I have a 2 node cluster running under Pacemaker 2.0.2, with around 20 resources
configured, the majority of which are LSB resources, but there are also a few
OCF ones. One of the LSB resources is controlled via an init script called
"logging" and runs only on the master node. The CIB
With Regards
Somanath Thilak J
-Original Message-
From: Jan Friesse
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2019 12:23
To: Cluster Labs - All topics related to open-source clustering welcomed
; Somanath Jeeva
Subject: Re: [ClusterLabs] Two node cluster goes into split brain scenario
during CPU
I have not configured fencing in our setup . However I would like to know if
the split brain can be avoided when high CPU occurs.
With Regards
Somanath Thilak J
-Original Message-
From: Ken Gaillot
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2019 20:28
To: Cluster Labs - All topics related to
We have User jobs running at the time the split brain scenario occurs. The CPU
load at that time is around 55 (We have 32 CPU cores). Is there any way we can
avoid the split brain scenario in this case.
With Regards
Somanath Thilak J
From: Emmanuel Gelati
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2019 01:57
