related to open-source clustering welcomed
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [ClusterLabs] Problems with master/slave failovers
On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 12:59 AM Ken Gaillot wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2019-07-01 at 23:30 +, Harvey Shepherd wrote:
> > > The "transition summary" is just a
On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 12:59 AM Ken Gaillot wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2019-07-01 at 23:30 +, Harvey Shepherd wrote:
> > > The "transition summary" is just a resource-by-resource list, not
> > > the
> > > order things will be done. The "executing cluster transition"
> > > section
> > > is the order
On Mon, 2019-07-01 at 23:30 +, Harvey Shepherd wrote:
> > The "transition summary" is just a resource-by-resource list, not
> > the
> > order things will be done. The "executing cluster transition"
> > section
> > is the order things are being done.
>
> Thanks Ken. I think that's where the
the slave.
From: Users on behalf of Andrei Borzenkov
Sent: Tuesday, 2 July 2019 3:42 p.m.
To: users@clusterlabs.org
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [ClusterLabs] Problems with master/slave failovers
02.07.2019 2:30, Harvey Shepherd пишет:
>> The "
02.07.2019 2:30, Harvey Shepherd пишет:
>> The "transition summary" is just a resource-by-resource list, not the
>> order things will be done. The "executing cluster transition" section
>> is the order things are being done.
>
> Thanks Ken. I think that's where the problem is originating. If you
> The "transition summary" is just a resource-by-resource list, not the
> order things will be done. The "executing cluster transition" section
> is the order things are being done.
Thanks Ken. I think that's where the problem is originating. If you look at the
"executing cluster transition"
es
in the same colocation, and want the primitives only with the master
role but the clones with any role -- that will require separate
constraints (the primitives colocated with the master role and ordered
after promote, the clones colocated without specifying the role and
ordered without s
ry ]
> servant4(lsb:servant4): Started secondary
> servant5 (lsb:servant5):Started secondary
> servant6 (lsb:servant6):Started secondary
> servant7 (lsb:servant7): Started secondary
> servant8 (lsb:servant8): Started secondary
> Resourc
n="promote | demote" setting,
but this isn't available. I tried adding two separate rules but Pacemaker
doesn't like that and none of the dependents start.
From: Harvey Shepherd
Sent: Sunday, 30 June 2019 5:34 p.m.
To: Cluster Labs - All topics related to
28.06.2019 9:45, Andrei Borzenkov пишет:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 7:24 AM Harvey Shepherd
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>>
>> I'm running Pacemaker 2.0.2 on a two node cluster. It runs one master/slave
>> resource (I'll refer to it as the king resource) and about 20 other
>> resources which are a
29.06.2019 8:05, Harvey Shepherd пишет:
> There is an ordering constraint - everything must be started after the king
> resource. But even if this constraint didn't exist I don't see that it should
> logically make any difference due to all the non-clone resources being
> colocated with the
?
Regards,
Harvey
From: Users on behalf of Andrei Borzenkov
Sent: Saturday, 29 June 2019 4:13 p.m.
To: users@clusterlabs.org
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [ClusterLabs] Problems with master/slave
I'll keep
digging and report back if I find any cause.
Thanks again,
Harvey
From: Users on behalf of Ken Gaillot
Sent: Saturday, 29 June 2019 3:10 a.m.
To: Cluster Labs - All topics related to open-source clustering welcomed
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [C
On Fri, 2019-06-28 at 07:36 +, Harvey Shepherd wrote:
> Thanks for your reply Andrei. Whilst I understand what you say about
> the difficulties of diagnosing issues without all of the info, it's a
> compromise between a mailing list posting being very verbose in which
> case nobody wants to
Thanks for your reply Andrei. Whilst I understand what you say about the
difficulties of diagnosing issues without all of the info, it's a compromise
between a mailing list posting being very verbose in which case nobody wants to
read it, and containing enough relevant information for someone
On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 7:24 AM Harvey Shepherd
wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
>
> I'm running Pacemaker 2.0.2 on a two node cluster. It runs one master/slave
> resource (I'll refer to it as the king resource) and about 20 other resources
> which are a mixture of:
>
>
> - resources that only run on the
Hi All,
I'm running Pacemaker 2.0.2 on a two node cluster. It runs one master/slave
resource (I'll refer to it as the king resource) and about 20 other resources
which are a mixture of:
- resources that only run on the king resource master node (colocation
constraint with a score of
17 matches
Mail list logo
