[Pacemaker] [PATCH devel] cts: make sure we only install applicable Audits

As subject says... Else we will have pacemaker Audits for corosync. -Angus diff -r e15be5fa5635 -r 0136017505ac cts/CTSaudits.py --- a/cts/CTSaudits.py Thu Mar 18 09:29:05 2010 +0100 +++ b/cts/CTSaudits.py Tue Mar 23 13:44:43 2010 +1100 @@ -779,5 +779,7 @@ def AuditList(cm): result = []

[Pacemaker] Unusual exit code with /etc/init.d/corosync stop

Hi all, I'm using corosync 1.2.0 from the packages of clusterlabs.org on openSuSE 11.2. A correct /etc/init.d/corosync stop issues a return code of 1 which definitely hurts the Cluster Test Suite when stopping the cluster stack asuming (IMHO correctly) that a problem free execution of the rc scri

Re: [Pacemaker] pacemaker resource constraints

Well, I guess my configuration is not as common. In my case, one of these resources, say resource A, suffers greater disruption if it is moved. So, after a failover I would prefer that resource B move, reversing the node placement. Is this possible to express? Alan On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:10 AM

Re: [Pacemaker] pacemaker resource constraints

Hi, On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 09:29:50AM -0700, Alan Jones wrote: > Friends, > I have what should be a simple goal. Two resources to run on two nodes. > I'd like to configure them to run on separate nodes when available, ie. > active-active, > and provide for them to run together on either node whe

[Pacemaker] Question about Dual Primary DRBD + OCFS2

Hi all, Following this doc http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Dual_Primary_DRBD_%2B_OCFS2, I've just installed 2 nodes (with some minors adjustements) and now I'm testing my setup. If I set one node in standby and bring it online again, the other node sees this node "Inconsistent". The node just b

[Pacemaker] pacemaker resource constraints

Friends, I have what should be a simple goal. Two resources to run on two nodes. I'd like to configure them to run on separate nodes when available, ie. active-active, and provide for them to run together on either node when one fails, ie. failover. Up until this point I have assumed that this wou

Re: [Pacemaker] Building an active/passive dhcp server

Am Freitag, 19. März 2010 schrieb Emmanuel Lesouef: > Hello, > > I'm trying to make a active/passive dhcp server. > > Currently, it works with the following setup : > > * 2 debian servers with pacemaker : > node1 with physical ip1 and virtual ip vip1 (managed with pacemaker) > node2 with physical i