On 28.10.2021 20:13, Gerry R Sommerville wrote:
>
> What we also found to be interesting is that if the cluster is only using a
> single heartbeat ring, then srv-2 will get fenced instead, and the
So as already suspected you did not actually isolate the node at all.
> pacemaker-remote
Hey Andrei, UlrichI am working with Janghyuk on his testing effort. Thank you for your responses, you have clarified some of the terminology we have been misusing.As Janghyuk mentions previously, we have two "full cluster" nodes using two-node quorum and multiple heart beat rings + two more
Hi all,
I hope to release the first release candidate for Pacemaker 2.1.2 next
week.
One of the most noticeable changes will be in failed action displays in
crm_mon. (This change will *not* show up if Pacemaker is built with the
--enable-compat-2.0 option.)
An example from one of our regression
On 28/10/2021 14:30, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
My understanding is that Azure does not have Layer 2 and it must know
every IP each VM is using. For virtual IP you can (should?) use Azure
load balancers - basically, you create a pool of one address, Azure
probes each node and detects which node
Could you use vxlan to create an overlay network, then use a floating ip
managed by the cluster on the overlay network, using that as a dependency for
service managing the floating ip from azure? I haven't fully thought through
this and it might be a tad hacky, but it feels like it should work.
On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 3:43 PM Paul Warwicker wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I originally posted this in the Azure forums first but have had no replies.
> Trying here instead in case anyone has encountered it.
>
> I am trying to setup up a High Availability Cluster in Azure using CentOS 8,
> Pacemaker
Hello,
I originally posted this in the Azure forums first but have had no
replies. Trying here instead in case anyone has encountered it.
I am trying to setup up a High Availability Cluster in Azure using
CentOS 8, Pacemaker and Corosync. Everything is deployed using terraform.
For our
>>> Andrei Borzenkov schrieb am 28.10.2021 um 09:58 in
Nachricht
:
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 10:30 AM Ulrich Windl
> wrote:
>>
>> Fencing _is_ a part of failover!
>>
>
> As any blanket answer this is mostly incorrect in this context.
If I read the logs correctly, a monitoring operation timed
I think OCF_RESOURCE_INSTANCE is the name of the cluster resource, which in my
case matches my vm name, but doesn't have to. Parsing the xml config for the
vm is safer, which is what the VirtualDomain RA does too.
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Thursday, October 28th, 2021 at 03:03,
On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 10:30 AM Ulrich Windl
wrote:
>
> Fencing _is_ a part of failover!
>
As any blanket answer this is mostly incorrect in this context.
There are two separate objects here - remote host itself and pacemaker
resource used to connect to and monitor state of remote host.
Fencing _is_ a part of failover!
>>> "Janghyuk Boo" schrieb am 26.10.2021 um 22:09 in
Nachricht
:
Dear Community ,
Thank you Ken for your reply last time.
I attached the log messages as requested from the last thread.
I have a Pacemaker cluster with two cluster nodes with two network interfaces
Hi!
I wonder: Shouldn't "OCF_RESOURCE_INSTANCE" help you to identify what is going
to be monitored?
(Reasonable naming assumed ;-))
Regards,
Ulrich
>>> Kyle O'Donnell schrieb am 26.10.2021 um 13:53 in
Nachricht
:
> ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> On Tuesday, October 26th, 2021 at 03:04,
12 matches
Mail list logo
