Re: [Pacemaker] cloning primatives with differing params

On 26/10/11 05:45, Brian J. Murrell wrote: I want to create a stonith primitive and clone it for each node in my cluster. I'm using the fence-agents virsh agent as my stonith primitive. Currently for a single node it looks like: primitive st-pm-node1 stonith:fence_virsh \ params ipaddr

Re: [Pacemaker] How to report bugs?

Hi, On 10/25/2011 9:34 PM, Chris Redekop wrote: I've been wanting to report a bug for a few weeks now but the bug report site (developerbugs.linux-foundation.org ) has been down for maintenance since I don't know when. Does anyone know what's up with

[Pacemaker] How to report bugs?

I've been wanting to report a bug for a few weeks now but the bug report site (developerbugs.linux-foundation.org) has been down for maintenance since I don't know when. Does anyone know what's up with it and if it's coming back? Has the bug reporting thinger been moved somewhere else? __

Re: [Pacemaker] Location based on resource utilization

2011/10/26 Andreas Kurz : > hello, > > On 10/25/2011 05:41 PM, agutxi Agustin wrote: >> Thank you Andreas! >> that's exactly what I was looking for :) >> I guess I was stuck with the documents from the older release. >> >> however, if you know the answer, I still would like to know (once I >> posed

Re: [Pacemaker] Location based on resource utilization

hello, On 10/25/2011 05:41 PM, agutxi Agustin wrote: > Thank you Andreas! > that's exactly what I was looking for :) > I guess I was stuck with the documents from the older release. > > however, if you know the answer, I still would like to know (once I > posed myself the question, I'm curious) i

[Pacemaker] cloning primatives with differing params

I want to create a stonith primitive and clone it for each node in my cluster. I'm using the fence-agents virsh agent as my stonith primitive. Currently for a single node it looks like: primitive st-pm-node1 stonith:fence_virsh \ params ipaddr="192.168.122.1" login="xxx" passwd="xxx" por

Re: [Pacemaker] Cluster goes to (unmanaged) Failed state when both nodes are rebooted together

On 25 Oct 2011, at 05:46, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote: > I'm afraid that quorum ignore and no stonith combination is a > lousy premise for a HA cluster. Since this is a two-node cluster, > ignoring quorum is necessary. But stonith is absolutely necessary > then to retain sanity. Otherwise, you'll be

Re: [Pacemaker] Cluster goes to (unmanaged) Failed state when both nodes are rebooted together

Hi, On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 07:52:16PM +0530, ihjaz Mohamed wrote: > Hi, > > I've tried moving the corosync startup from S20 to S98 but the issue is still > there. > > Maybe I'll have to remove it from init and write an upstart for corosync. I'm afraid that quorum ignore and no stonith combina

Re: [Pacemaker] Location based on resource utilization

Thank you Andreas! that's exactly what I was looking for :) I guess I was stuck with the documents from the older release. however, if you know the answer, I still would like to know (once I posed myself the question, I'm curious) if it's a good practice to mess with the CRM from the resource agen

Re: [Pacemaker] Cluster goes to (unmanaged) Failed state when both nodes are rebooted together

Hi, I've tried moving the corosync startup from S20 to S98 but the issue is still there. Maybe I'll have to remove it from init and write an upstart for corosync. From: Andreas Kurz To: pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org Sent: Tuesday, 25 October 2011 6:50 PM Subj

Re: [Pacemaker] Cluster goes to (unmanaged) Failed state when both nodes are rebooted together

hello, On 10/25/2011 09:17 AM, ihjaz Mohamed wrote: > If I start the corosync together on both the servers, it comes up good. > So am just wondering how is this different from corosync being started > by the server during boot up. maybe corosync ist started to early on system boot when network co

[Pacemaker] FW: Pacemaker: Change of network IPs of nodes on running cluster

Hello all, I have a 2-node cluster running with Pacemaker/Corosync since a year. Now I had to change the IPs of the two nodes because we have moved the cluster onto another network. Since that change the cluster is no longer running. There was no change on the corosync link itself, corosync is st

Re: [Pacemaker] When a resource starts all at once in environment using utilization, score may not work

Hi Yuusuke, On 10/20/11 20:43, Yuusuke Iida wrote: > Hi, Yan > > (2011/09/26 17:46), Gao,Yan wrote: >> A glance to the transition. After grpPostgreSQLDB3 was assigned to act1, >> grpPostgreSQLDB1 was chosen to be processed, and it was assigned to act2 >> (because it had no preference between act2

Re: [Pacemaker] Location based on resource utilization

On 10/25/2011 01:36 AM, agutxi Agustin wrote: > Hi list, > I'm new to pacemaker (though I've fought my battles with former > heartbeat), so please don't go harsh on me ;D > I have read through all the documentation I found in the internet for > corosync/pacemaker/ras and have done and tested a few

Re: [Pacemaker] Cluster goes to (unmanaged) Failed state when both nodes are rebooted together

If I start the corosync together on both the servers, it comes up good. So am just wondering how is this different from corosync being started by the server during boot up. From: Andreas Kurz To: pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org Sent: Monday, 24 October 2011 9:30