On 26 Jun 2014, at 8:18 am, Gianluca Cecchi <gianluca.cec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 1:51 AM, Digimer <li...@alteeve.ca> wrote: > Excellent. > > Please note; With IPMI-only fencing, you may find that killing all power to > the node will cause fencing to fail, as the IPMI's BMC will lose power as > well (unless it has it's own battery, but most don't). > > If you find this, then the solution I would recommend is to get a pair of > switched PDUs (I like the APC brand AP7900, very fast and the fence_apc_snmp > agent is very well tested). With this, you can then setup STONITH levels; > > http://clusterlabs.org/wiki/STONITH_Levels > > With this, if the IPMI fails, Pacemaker will move on and try fencing by > cutting power to the lost node, providing a backup method of fencing. If you > use stacked switches, put the PDUs on one switch and the IPMI interface on > the other switch, and you will provide reliable fencing in a failed-switch > state, too. > > Cheers! > > > Good points. At the moment this is a lab environment so it is not crucial, > but I'll take in mind for production use. > > One point: after doing some tests and creating failures of nodes for test I > see this behaviour about the special fencing resource > > normal behaviour > [root@srvmgmt02 ~]# crm_mon -1 > ... > [snip] > fence_srvmgmt01 (stonith:fence_intelmodular): Started > srvmgmt01.localdomain.local > fence_srvmgmt02 (stonith:fence_intelmodular): Started > srvmgmt02.localdomain.local > > after fencing of srvmgmt01 (because of drbd problem deliberately produced by > me on it) > [root@srvmgmt02 ~]# crm_mon -1 > ... > [snip] > fence_srvmgmt01 (stonith:fence_intelmodular): Started > srvmgmt02.localdomain.local > fence_srvmgmt02 (stonith:fence_intelmodular): Started > srvmgmt02.localdomain.local > > and the output above remains true while srvmgmt01 is rebooting but also after > it has completed startup and joins the cluster. > So I presume I have to set an location constraint rule so that it can only > run on its node, correct? Not really. It's not really relevant which node has the fencing device - thats mostly just the node that will check the device is still healthy/correctly configured. Every node can use the device's configuration when needed. > > something llike > pcs constraint location fence_srvmgmt01 prefers > srvmgmt01.localdomain.local=INFINITY > pcs constraint location fence_srvmgmt02 prefers > srvmgmt02.localdomain.local=INFINITY > > Gianluca > _______________________________________________ > 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
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ 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
