Re: [ClusterLabs] Sync Apache config files

Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org -- Regards Denis Gribkov smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org

Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: Corosync ring marked as FAULTY

to help me, and be be careful to DNS names when you're using similar configuration :) -- Regards Denis Gribkov smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://lists.clusterlabs.org/ma

Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: Corosync ring marked as FAULTY

Pacemaker? For sure - I have no any unusual settings for pacemaker in /etc/sysconfig. Thank you. -- Regards Denis Gribkov smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://lists.clusterl

Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: Corosync ring marked as FAULTY

505 -vv -X Thanks for your advice, I'll ask network engineers about the issue. -- Regards Denis Gribkov smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman

Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: Corosync ring marked as FAULTY

, bliu wrote: Hi, Denis could you try tcpdump "udp port 5505" on the private network to see if there is packet? On 02/22/2017 03:47 PM, Denis Gribkov wrote: In our case it does not create problems since all nodes are located in few networks whichserved by single router. There a

Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: Corosync ring marked as FAULTY

no good idea how to found the issue. On 22/02/17 09:37, Ulrich Windl wrote: Is "ttl 1" a good idea for a public network? Denis Gribkov schrieb am 21.02.2017 um 18:26 in Nachricht <4f5543c4-b80c-659d-ed5e-7a99e1482...@itsts.net>: Hi Everyone. I have 16-nodes asynchronous cl

[ClusterLabs] Corosync ring marked as FAULTY

70404b0 expected-quorum-votes: 3 have-watchdog: false last-lrm-refresh: 1484068350 maintenance-mode: false no-quorum-policy: ignore pe-error-series-max: 1000 pe-input-series-max: 1000 pe-warn-series-max: 1000 stonith-action: reboot stonith-enabled: false symmetric-cluster: false Thank

[ClusterLabs] No match for shutdown action on

0 pe-warn-series-max: 1000 stonith-action: reboot stonith-enabled: false symmetric-cluster: false Thank you. -- Regards Denis Gribkov ___ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project

Re: [ClusterLabs] Warning: handle_startup_fencing: Blind faith: not fencing unseen nodes

Thanks for detailed explanation. This was very helpful. I had removed option startup-fencing: false now the warning message was gone. On 14/12/16 20:12, Ken Gaillot wrote: On 12/14/2016 11:14 AM, Denis Gribkov wrote: Hi Everyone, Our company have 15-nodes asynchronous cluster without

[ClusterLabs] Warning: handle_startup_fencing: Blind faith: not fencing unseen nodes

Hi Everyone, Our company have 15-nodes asynchronous cluster without actually configured FENCING/STONITH (as I think) features. The DC node log getting tons of messages like in subject: pengine: warning: handle_startup_fencing: Blind faith: not fencing unseen nodes the message repeated 15