On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 06:21:46PM +0200, RaSca wrote: > Il giorno Lun 19 Set 2011 17:55:58 CEST, Dejan Muhamedagic ha scritto: > > Hi, > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 09:43:43AM +0200, RaSca wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> I've got a two node pacemaker/corosync cluster with some virtual domain > >> resources on some DRBD devices. > >> Every DRBD device is configured in dual primary setup and I have enabled > >> the live migration. Cluster has also stonith enabled. > >> My problem is that if a live migration for a single virtualdomain > >> resource fails, then this node gets fenced, making unavailable also all > > AFAIK, failing migration shouldn't result in node fence. I guess > > that actually the subsequent stop operation failed, right? In > > that case, that's probably a bug somewhere in the RA or VM code. > > Thanks, > > Dejan > > Hi Dejan, > thanks as usual for your response. In the end, since that I was facing > too much unexplainable problems I decided to upgrade libvirt and the > kernel itself to a newer version (from squeeze to squeeze-backports). > Until now problems seems to be resolved. > > In Pacemaker Explained (Andrew, I'm almost finished with the > translation, I swear!) it is written that the default action on fail is > "fence", so it is assumed that if a single resource fails, then the > entire node is fenced. Note that at the moment every of my virtualdomain > resource have got the on-fail action set with "restart", and I've not > faced any fence. > But please, help me to understand this: what do you mean with > "subsequent stop operation"?
Cluster may issue a stop operation if migrate_x fails. > It is very plausible that this was the > reason, since the failed virtual machines were in state "paused" even if > I was forcing the stop. Does this is enough to make a node fence? Why > this failure is not considered in "on-fail" parameter declaration? on-fail is a per-operation attribute. By default, it is set to fence only for the stop operation. The point is that a failed stop means that the cluster cannot establish the state of the resource anymore, so the only remedy remaining is to fence the node. Thanks, Dejan > Do I made myself clear? > > Thanks a lot, > > -- > RaSca > Mia Mamma Usa Linux: Niente รจ impossibile da capire, se lo spieghi bene! > [email protected] > http://www.miamammausalinux.org > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-HA mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
