On 11/29/2017 09:09 PM, Kristoffer Grönlund wrote: > Adam Spiers <aspi...@suse.com> writes: > >> OK, so reading between the lines, if we don't want our cluster's >> latest config changes accidentally discarded during a complete cluster >> reboot, we should ensure that the last man standing is also the first >> one booted up - right? > That would make sense to me, but I don't know if it's the only > solution. If you separately ensure that they all have the same > configuration first, you could start them in any order I guess.
I guess it is not that bad as after the last man standing has left the stage it would take a quorate number (actually depending on how many you allow to survive) of nodes till anything happens again (equivalent to wait-for-all in 2-node clusters). And one of these should have a reasonably current cib. > >> If so, I think that's a perfectly reasonable thing to ask for, but >> maybe it should be documented explicitly somewhere? Apologies if it >> is already and I missed it. > Yeah, maybe a section discussing both starting and stopping a whole > cluster would be helpful, but I don't know if I feel like I've thought > about it enough myself. Regarding the HP Service Guard commands that > Ulrich Windl mentioned, the very idea of such commands offends me on > some level but I don't know if I can clearly articulate why. :D > _______________________________________________ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://lists.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
