On 27/06/2013, at 2:21 AM, Саша Александров wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Fencing is disabled for now, the issue is not with fencing: the question is -
> why only one out of three DRBD master-slave sets is recognized by pacemaker,
Pacemaker knows nothing of drbd or any other kind of service.
All that know
On 27/06/2013, at 3:40 AM, andreas graeper wrote:
> thanks four your answer.
> but still question open.
>
> when i switch off the active node: though this is done reliable for me, the
> still passive node wants to know for sure and will kill the (already dead)
> former active node.
> i have
On 28/06/2013, at 12:52 AM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
>> Maybe you're right, maybe I should stop fighting it and go with the
>> firefox approach.
>> That certainly seemed to piss a lot of people off though...
>
> If there's one message I've learned in 13 years of work on Linux HA,
> then it is
On 06/26/2013 03:52 PM, Digimer wrote:
> This question appears to be the same issue asked here:
>
> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/pacemaker/2013-June/018650.html
>
> In my case, I have two fence methods per node; IPMI first with
> action="reboot" and, if that fails, two PDUs (one backing e
On 06/27/2013 11:45 AM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2013-06-27T11:32:36, Digimer wrote:
>
time and I expect many users will run into this problem as they try to
migrate to RHEL 7. I see no reason why this can't be properly handled in
pacemaker directly.
>>> Yes, why not, choice
Effectively Lars, just editing the attribute symmetric cluster and
setting it to true made the resource work. This also has helped me to
clarify the concepts of assymetric and symetric clusters.
Thanks,
Jacobo García
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2013-06-27T17:
On 2013-06-27T11:32:36, Digimer wrote:
> >> time and I expect many users will run into this problem as they try to
> >> migrate to RHEL 7. I see no reason why this can't be properly handled in
> >> pacemaker directly.
> > Yes, why not, choice is a good thing ;-)
> If an established configuration
On 06/27/2013 11:08 AM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2013-06-27T10:56:40, Digimer wrote:
>
>> However, this feels like a really bad solution. It's not uncommon to
>> have two separate power rails feeding either side of the node's PSUs.
>> Particularly in HA environments.
>
> True. But gating t
On 2013-06-27T17:01:37, Jacobo García wrote:
> Enable assymetric clustering
> crm_attribute --attr-name symmetric-cluster --attr-value false
>
> Then I configure the resource:
> crm configure primitive ping ocf:pacemaker:ping params
> host_list="10.34.151.73" op monitor interval=15s timeout=5s
>
On 2013-06-27T10:56:40, Digimer wrote:
> However, this feels like a really bad solution. It's not uncommon to
> have two separate power rails feeding either side of the node's PSUs.
> Particularly in HA environments.
True. But gating them through the same power switch is *not* a SPoF from
the cl
Hello
I am trying to configure a simple ping resource in order to start
understanding the mechanics under pacemaker.
I have sucessfully configured corosync between 2 EC2 nodes on the same
region, with the following configuration:
logging{
to_logfile: yes
logfile: /var/log/corosync.log
}
tot
On 2013-06-27T16:52:02, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> > I don't want the cluster stack to start on boot, so I disable
> > pacemaker/corosync. However, I do want the node to power back on so that
> > I can log into it when the alarms go off. Yes, I could log into the good
> > node, manually unfence/b
On 06/27/2013 10:52 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 09:54:13AM -0400, Digimer wrote:
>> On 06/27/2013 07:02 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 03:52:00PM -0400, Digimer wrote:
This question appears to be the same issue asked here:
>
On 2013-06-27T20:50:34, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> There was one :-)
> I merged the best bits of three parallel CPG code paths.
> The things that prompted the extra bits in one also applied to the others.
Ah, that wasn't so obvious to me when I tried making sense of the
commit. ;-) But that's clear
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 09:54:13AM -0400, Digimer wrote:
> On 06/27/2013 07:02 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 03:52:00PM -0400, Digimer wrote:
> >> This question appears to be the same issue asked here:
> >>
> >> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/pacemaker/
On 06/27/2013 07:02 AM, Dejan Muhamedagic wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 03:52:00PM -0400, Digimer wrote:
>> This question appears to be the same issue asked here:
>>
>> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/pacemaker/2013-June/018650.html
>>
>> In my case, I have two fence methods per no
On 25/06/2013, at 9:44 PM, Francesco Namuri wrote:
>> Can you attach /var/lib/pengine/pe-input-64.bz2 from SERVERNAME1 please?
>>
>> I'll be able to see if its something we've already fixed.
Nope still there. I will attempt to fix this tomorrow.
___
On 27/06/2013, at 10:29 PM, Bernardo Cabezas Serra wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Ohhh, sorry, but I have deleted node selavi and restarted, and now works
> OK and I can't reproduce the bug :(
That is unfortunate
>
> El 27/06/13 12:32, Andrew Beekhof escribió:
>> o, more likely a bug. Which is concern
Hi Emmanuel,
El 27/06/13 12:26, emmanuel segura escribió:
> Hello Bernardo
> I don't know if this is the problem, but try this option
> clear_node_high_bit
Thanks so much, but as i stated to Andrew I can't reproduce issue any
more. Now works fine after some rebooting and node deleting.
Bes
Hello,
Ohhh, sorry, but I have deleted node selavi and restarted, and now works
OK and I can't reproduce the bug :(
El 27/06/13 12:32, Andrew Beekhof escribió:
> o, more likely a bug. Which is concerning since I thought I had this
> particular kind ironed out.
>
> Could you set PCMK_trace_fun
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 21:59:29 +1000
Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> I would _highly_ recommend 0.14 for use with any version of pacemaker
> that uses libqb.
Hi Andrew,
using the libqb-dev from Debian Sid I was able to compile the recent
pacemaker version (from github) without errors.
I didn't had time
On 27/06/2013, at 1:53 AM, Denis Witt
wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:33:30 +1000
> Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>
>>> When you run ./autogen.sh it tries to start an rpm command, this
>>> failed because I didn't had rpm installed.
>>
>> How did it fail?
>> That whole block if intended to be skipp
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 03:52:00PM -0400, Digimer wrote:
> This question appears to be the same issue asked here:
>
> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/pacemaker/2013-June/018650.html
>
> In my case, I have two fence methods per node; IPMI first with
> action="reboot" and, if that fails,
On 27/06/2013, at 5:40 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2013-06-27T14:28:19, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>
>> I wouldn't say the 6 months between 1.1.7 and 1.1.8 was a particularly
>> aggressive release cycle.
>
> For the amount of changes in there, I think yes. And the intrusive ones
> didn't s
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 06:41:29PM +0200, Sven Arnold wrote:
>
> >>Do you manage the multipath daemon with pacemaker? In my setup multipath
> >>is started at boot time and not managed by pacemaker.
> >
> >Yes. And all multipath records as well. That is the part of my iscsi RA.
>
> Ah, you ar
On 27/06/2013, at 8:20 PM, Bernardo Cabezas Serra wrote:
> ¿Do you think it's a configuration problem?
No, more likely a bug. Which is concerning since I thought I had this
particular kind ironed out.
Could you set PCMK_trace_functions=crm_get_peer on selavi and repeat the test?
The exact
Hello Bernardo
I don't know if this is the problem, but try this option
clear_node_high_bit
This configuration option is optional and is only relevant
when no nodeid is specified. Some openais clients require a signed 32
bit nodeid that is
greater than zer
Hello,
Our cluster was working OK on corosync stack, with corosync 2.3.0 and
pacemaker 1.1.8.
After upgrading (full versions and configs below), we began to have
problems with node names.
It's a two node cluster, with node names "turifel" (DC) and "selavi".
When selavi joins cluster, we have thi
Il 27/06/2013 01:22, Chris Feist ha scritto:
On 06/24/13 16:33, Mailing List SVR wrote:
Hi,
I defined this clone resource for connectivity check:
pcs resource create ping ocf:pacemaker:ping host_list="10.0.2.2"
multiplier="1000" dampen=10s op monitor interval=60s
pcs resource clone ping ping_
On 2013-06-27T14:28:19, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> I wouldn't say the 6 months between 1.1.7 and 1.1.8 was a particularly
> aggressive release cycle.
For the amount of changes in there, I think yes. And the intrusive ones
didn't show up all at the beginning of that cycle, either. That just
made in
30 matches
Mail list logo
