On 06/25/2013 07:29 AM, andreas graeper wrote: > hi, > maybe again and again the same question, please excuse. > > two nodes (n1 active / n2 passive) and `service corosync stop` on active. > does the node, that is going down, tells the other that he has gone, > before he actually disconnect ? > so that there is no reason for n2 to kill n1 ? > > on n2 after n1.corosync.stop : > > drbd:promote OK > lvm:start OK > filesystem:start OK > but ipaddr2 still stopped ? > > n1::drbd:demote works ?! so i would expect that all that depending > resource should have been > stopped successfully ?! > and if not, why ? why should ipaddr2:stop fail > and if it would fail, can filesystem:stop , lvm:stop , drbd:demote > succeed ? > > how can i find some hint in logs why ipaddr fails to start ? > > thanks > andreas
If you stop corosync while pacemaker is running, it may well still get fenced (I've not tested this myself). If you want to gracefully shut down without a fence, migrate the services off of the node (if any were running), then stop pacemaker, then stop corosync and it should be fine. -- Digimer Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/ What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without access to education? _______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
