>>> Dennis Jacobfeuerborn <denni...@conversis.de> schrieb am 19.03.2016 um >>> 15:10 in Nachricht <56ed5dc4.9080...@conversis.de>:
[...] > I think the key issue here is that people think about corosync they > believe there can only be two state for membership (true or false) when > in reality there are three possible states: true, false and unknown. Aren't there even more like "integrating", etc.? > > The problem then is that corosync apparently has no built-in way to deal > with the "unknown" situation and requires guidance from an external > entity for that (in this case pacemakers fencing). Isn't a node either member of a ring or not? Does "unkown" mean "temporariliy inconsistent", or what's the exact definition (now that we started talking on it)? > > This means that corosync alone simply cannot give you reliable > membership guarantees. I strictly requires external help to be able to > provide that. > > Regards, > Dennis > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org > http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf > Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org _______________________________________________ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
