11.09.2014 05:57, Norbert Kiam Maclang wrote:
> Is this something to do with quorum? But I already set
You'd need to configure fencing at the drbd resources level.
http://www.drbd.org/users-guide-emb/s-pacemaker-fencing.html#s-pacemaker-fencing-cib
>
> property no-quorum-policy="ignore" \
> e
Following command was failing
pcs resource master ms-f3611cc5-a68f-4c69-ab35-a9b226473e5d
vha-f3611cc5-a68f-4c69-ab35-a9b226473e5d meta clone-max=2
globally-unique=false target-role=started
So i did the following
pcs resource master ms-f3611cc5-a68f-4c69-ab35-a9b226473e5d
vha-f3611cc5-a68f-4c69
On 11 Sep 2014, at 12:57 pm, Norbert Kiam Maclang
wrote:
> Is this something to do with quorum? But I already set
>
> property no-quorum-policy="ignore" \
> expected-quorum-votes="1"
No fencing wouldn't be helping.
And it looks like drbd resources are hanging, not pacemaker/corosync.
Is this something to do with quorum? But I already set
property no-quorum-policy="ignore" \
expected-quorum-votes="1"
Thanks in advance,
Kiam
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:09 AM, Norbert Kiam Maclang <
norbert.kiam.macl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please help me understand what is causing the p
Hi,
Please help me understand what is causing the problem. I have a 2 node
cluster running on vms using KVM. Each vm (I am using Ubuntu 14.04) runs on
a separate hypervisor on separate machines. All are working well during
testing (I restarted the vms alternately), but after a day when I kill the
On 09/07/2014 08:12 PM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On 5 Sep 2014, at 2:22 pm, renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> We confirmed that lrmd caused the time-out of the monitor when the time of
>> the system was revised.
>> When a system considers revision of the time when I used ntpd, it
Am Montag, 8. September 2014, 12:30:23 schrieb Fabio M. Di Nitto:
> All,
>
> it's been almost 6 years since we had a face to face meeting for all
> developers and vendors involved in Linux HA.
>
> I'd like to try and organize a new event and piggy-back with DevConf in
> Brno [1].
>
> DevConf wil
Hi Andrew (and others).
For a certain use case (yes, I'm talking about DRBD "peer-fencing" on
loss of replication link), it would be nice to be able to say:
update some_attribute=some_attribute+1 where some_attribute >= 0
delete some_attribute where some_attribute=0
Ok, that's not the clas
