On Feb 9, 2009, at 12:25 PM, Romi Verma wrote:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Andrew Beekhof <beek...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Feb 9, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 03:09:40PM +0530, Romi Verma wrote:
sorry to interrupt in between. just one question from my side. if
no-quorum-policy is set to freeze then resource is not supposed to
stop .
right.
in
that case node will not be fenced right??
no-quorum-policy has nothing to do with fencing.
well, depending on what it's set to, it can prevent fencing (no-
quorum-policy != ignore) or cause it to be initiated when quorum is
lost (no-quorum-policy == suicide)
but if you're using freeze, and a resource must stop for other
reasons but fails to, then the node will not be shot (although it
probably should be).
Thanks Andrew,
in case of more then 2 nodes we cant use no-quorum-policy to
"ignore" as we cant just ignore quourum. as you said in case of
freeze node will not be fenced.
right, but thats a good thing.
It only applies if you have an even split (ie. 2-2) where no-one has
quorum.
you only want to fence if you plan on taking over the other side's
resources - which freeze wont do.
if you get a 3-1 split, then the side that has quorum _will_ shoot the
1 node and take over its resources.
so we have only two remaining suicide and stop. in case of suicide
node does not fence other it just reset itself.
itself and anyone else in its current partition
So the only remaining no-quorum-policy is "stop" and if resource
fails to stop then the node should be fenced. am i right??
i think so
_______________________________________________
Pacemaker mailing list
Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org
http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
