On 15 Aug 2014, at 4:02 am, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> В Thu, 14 Aug 2014 12:45:27 +1000 > Andrew Beekhof <and...@beekhof.net> пишет: > >>> >>> It statically assigns priorities to cluster nodes. I need to >>> dynamically assign higher priority (lower delay) to a node that is >>> currently running application to ensure that application survives. It >>> was relatively easy in other cluster products I worked with, but I >>> cannot figure out how to do it in pacemaker so far. >> >> Its not something we have traditionally supported as it only really makes >> sense in a strict active/passive environment. > > Not really - second node may run non-production applications that we do > not really care about in case of split brain. > > But thank you for confirming it is not me :) > >> As soon as you have more than one node hosting resources, or hosting more >> than one resource, determining the priority quickly gets complicated. >> >> Better to avoid split-brain in the first place. >> Add a third node? (Even if you don't allow it to run services). >> That way when a node disappears, its almost certainly because its >> dead/failed. >> > > I have to work with what I get ... qdisk? a VM on some other server?
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
