On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 6:10 AM Gabriele Bulfon <gbul...@sonicle.com> wrote:
> Thanks to all your suggestions, I now have the systems with stonith > configured on ipmi. > > Two questions: > - how can I simulate a stonith situation to check that everything is ok? > You can run `stonith_admin -B <node>` to tell Pacemaker to reboot the node using the configured stonith devices. If you want to test a network failure, you can have iptables block inbound and outbound traffic on the heartbeat IP address on one node. > - considering that I have both nodes with stonith against the other node, > once the two nodes can communicate, how can I be sure the two nodes will > not try to stonith each other? > The simplest option is to add a delay attribute (e.g., delay=10) to one of the stonith devices. That way, if both nodes want to fence each other, the node whose stonith device has a delay configured will wait for the delay to expire before executing the reboot action. Alternatively, you can set up corosync-qdevice, using a separate system running qnetd server as a quorum arbitrator. > :) > Thanks! > Gabriele > > > > *Sonicle S.r.l. *: http://www.sonicle.com > *Music: *http://www.gabrielebulfon.com > *Quantum Mechanics : *http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/gabrielebulfon > > ------------------------------ > > > *Da:* Gabriele Bulfon <gbul...@sonicle.com> > *A:* Cluster Labs - All topics related to open-source clustering welcomed > <users@clusterlabs.org> > *Data:* 29 luglio 2020 14.22.42 CEST > *Oggetto:* Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: [EXT] Stonith failing > > > > It is a ZFS based illumos system. > I don't think SBD is an option. > Is there a reliable ZFS based stonith? > > Gabriele > > > > *Sonicle S.r.l. *: http://www.sonicle.com > *Music: *http://www.gabrielebulfon.com > *Quantum Mechanics : *http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/gabrielebulfon > > ------------------------------ > > > *Da:* Andrei Borzenkov <arvidj...@gmail.com> > *A:* Cluster Labs - All topics related to open-source clustering welcomed > <users@clusterlabs.org> > *Data:* 29 luglio 2020 9.46.09 CEST > *Oggetto:* Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: [EXT] Stonith failing > > > > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 9:01 AM Gabriele Bulfon <gbul...@sonicle.com> > wrote: > >> That one was taken from a specific implementation on Solaris 11. >> The situation is a dual node server with shared storage controller: both >> nodes see the same disks concurrently. >> Here we must be sure that the two nodes are not going to import/mount the >> same zpool at the same time, or we will encounter data corruption: >> > > ssh based "stonith" cannot guarantee it. > > >> node 1 will be perferred for pool 1, node 2 for pool 2, only in case one >> of the node goes down or is taken offline the resources should be first >> free by the leaving node and taken by the other node. >> >> Would you suggest one of the available stonith in this case? >> >> > > IPMI, managed PDU, SBD ... > In practice, the only stonith method that works in case of complete node > outage including any power supply is SBD. > > _______________________________________________ > Manage your subscription:https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > Manage your subscription:https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > Manage your subscription: > https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ > -- Regards, Reid Wahl, RHCA Software Maintenance Engineer, Red Hat CEE - Platform Support Delivery - ClusterHA
_______________________________________________ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/