On 10/21/2014 06:44 AM, Balázs Gibizer wrote: > Hi, > > Sorry for the top posting but it was hard to fit my complete view inline. > > I'm also thinking about a possible solution for automatic server > evacuation. I see two separate sub problems of this problem: > 1)compute node monitoring and fencing, 2)automatic server evacuation > > Compute node monitoring is currently implemented in servicegroup > module of nova. As far as I understand pacemaker is the proposed > solution in this thread to solve both monitoring and fencing but we > tried and found out that pacemaker_remote on baremetal does not work > together with fencing (yet), see [1]. So if we need fencing then > either we have to go for normal pacemaker instead of pacemaker_remote > but that solution doesn't scale or we configure and call stonith > directly when pacemaker detect the compute node failure.
I didn't get the same conclusion from the link you reference. It says: "That is not to say however that fencing of a baremetal node works any differently than that of a normal cluster-node. The Pacemaker policy engine understands how to fence baremetal remote-nodes. As long as a fencing device exists, the cluster is capable of ensuring baremetal nodes are fenced in the exact same way as normal cluster-nodes are fenced." So, it sounds like the core pacemaker cluster can fence the node to me. I CC'd David Vossel, a pacemaker developer, to see if he can help clarify. -- Russell Bryant _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
