On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:26 PM, Bernd Schubert <[email protected]> wrote: > On 02/19/2013 06:53 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 7:34 PM, Bruce Ford <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Lukas, >>> >>> thanks for the quick reply. >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Lukas Grossar >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On 15.02.2013 16:43, Bruce Ford wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I'm running pacemaker 1.1.7 on RedHat 6.3 using the fence_ipmilan >>>>> fence agent from the "fence-agents" 3.1.5 package. >>>>> >>>>> I found that although I have chosen the action "off", this doesn't >>>>> power off the target node but reboots it with a graceful shutdown. So >>>>> I investigated on the commandline: >>>> >>>> I ran into the same problem when setting up a cluster using CentOS 6.3 >>>> and sent a mail to the mailing list about a week ago and got the >>>> following reaction from Andrew Beekhof: >>>> >>>>> Prior to 6.4 there was some inconsistency between the various agents >>>>> and whether they supported "action" or "option". >>>>> An upgrade to 6.4 in the next few weeks should solve this for you. >>> >>> Does 6.4 mean RedHat/Centos 6.4? What a pity, this is currently not an >>> option. >>> Will we face serious problems trying to backport the new fence-agents >>> package? >> >> No, should be pretty straightforward > > So that will introduce another serious change of behaviour in RHEL 6.4?
No. All agents now support "action". Anything that used to support "option" will continue to do so. > What is the 'official' procedure to reset a node without using > "ipmi reset" then? The only reliable way with ipmi to reset a node is to: > > 1) power off > 2) check status > 3) Wait some time (ideally configurable, as that timeout depends on the > hardware) > 4) power on > > Except of step-3 using fence_ipmilan and the "off" method worked rather > well, at least for hardware that didn't need a 30s to 60s sleep time > before power-on. > Now if we have to switch to "reset" and then "ipmi reset" is being send, > how do we now the reset really succeeded? Firstly messages over network > might never reach the target and secondly, AFAIK, acording to ipmi specs > the reset command is not required to be executed. I also have seen it > several times in real live that one had to repeat an ipmi command such > as "power off" before it was accepted by the ipmi-adapter. > > Now one the advantages of a stable-system such as RHEL once has been > that it didn't introduce serious changes in behaviour. So once one had > tested this platform, everything would still work after performing an > upgrade. Now besides removing 'crm' also the tested behaviour of stonith > is going to break? > > > Thanks, > Bernd > > _______________________________________________ > 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
