Re: [Pacemaker] Build dlm_controld for pacemaker stack (dlm_controld.pcmk)

2012-10-29 Thread Vladislav Bogdanov
29.10.2012 22:10, David Vossel wrote: > > > - Original Message - >> From: "Bernardo Cabezas Serra" >> To: pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org >> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 11:51:51 AM >> Subject: [Pacemaker] Build dlm_controld for pacemaker stack >> (dlm_controld.pcmk) >> >> >> Hello, >>

Re: [Pacemaker] RFC: Any interesting in 2.0.0 betas?

2012-10-29 Thread Vladislav Bogdanov
30.10.2012 04:27, Andrew Beekhof wrote: > On reflection, I think making this configurable is going to cause more > trouble than its worth. > Any sysconfig mismatch between the nodes would result in major breakage. > > We need to pick one way and make it the default - if people want/need > anything

Re: [Pacemaker] node can't join cluster after reboot

2012-10-29 Thread Vladimir Elisseev
Thanks for trying to help! Currently I can't provide crm_report from the failed node, as I've decided to restore the complete node from backup. The versions I use are corosync-1.3.0 and pacemaker-1.0.10. Actually the problem occurred after updating quiet a few system packages, but all the cluster r

Re: [Pacemaker] cannot mount gfs2 filesystem

2012-10-29 Thread Andrew Beekhof
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Soni Maula Harriz wrote: > dear all, > i configure pacemaker and corosync on 2 Centos 6.3 servers by following > instruction on 'Cluster from Scratch'. > on the beginning, i follow 'Cluster from Scratch' edition 5. but, since i > use centos, i change to 'Cluster fr

Re: [Pacemaker] node can't join cluster after reboot

2012-10-29 Thread Andrew Beekhof
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Vladimir Elisseev wrote: > Hello, > > I'm having problem that after reboot one cluster node can't join cluster > anymore. Form the log file I can't understand what actually is going on. > I only can see, that cib and crm both are respawned frequently. I'd > appreci

Re: [Pacemaker] pacemaker service start failed.

2012-10-29 Thread Andrew Beekhof
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Yuusuke Iida wrote: > Hi, Andrew > > > (2012/10/26 9:31), Andrew Beekhof wrote: >>> >>> When I described the IP which I used in ring0 in /etc/hosts, I confirmed >>> >that start of pacemaker succeeded. >>> > >> >> [moved first question to the end] > > I understood t

Re: [Pacemaker] RFC: Any interesting in 2.0.0 betas?

2012-10-29 Thread Andrew Beekhof
On reflection, I think making this configurable is going to cause more trouble than its worth. Any sysconfig mismatch between the nodes would result in major breakage. We need to pick one way and make it the default - if people want/need anything else, they need to use the corosync node list. For

Re: [Pacemaker] Build dlm_controld for pacemaker stack (dlm_controld.pcmk)

2012-10-29 Thread Andrew Beekhof
On 30/10/2012, at 3:51 AM, Bernardo Cabezas Serra wrote: > Hello, > > disclaimer: I have posted this issue to linux-ha list too a couple of days > ago. I'm sorry if this is not the correct list, and thanks if you can give me > a hint about which cluster stack should I use for ocfs2 by now. >

Re: [Pacemaker] Build dlm_controld for pacemaker stack (dlm_controld.pcmk)

2012-10-29 Thread David Vossel
- Original Message - > From: "Bernardo Cabezas Serra" > To: pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 11:51:51 AM > Subject: [Pacemaker] Build dlm_controld for pacemaker stack > (dlm_controld.pcmk) > > > Hello, > > disclaimer: I have posted this issue to linux-

[Pacemaker] Build dlm_controld for pacemaker stack (dlm_controld.pcmk)

2012-10-29 Thread Bernardo Cabezas Serra
Title: APSL Hello, disclaimer: I have posted this issue to linux-ha list too a couple of days ago. I'm sorry if this is not the correct list, and thanks if you can give me a hint about which cluster stack should I use for ocfs2 by now. I'm trying to com

Re: [Pacemaker] pacemaker service start failed.

2012-10-29 Thread Yuusuke Iida
Hi, Andrew (2012/10/26 9:31), Andrew Beekhof wrote: When I described the IP which I used in ring0 in /etc/hosts, I confirmed >that start of pacemaker succeeded. > [moved first question to the end] I understood that name solution was necessary. >Was there any problem with a conventional met