Re: [Pacemaker] RFC: stonith-enabled="error-recovery"

2010-06-25 Thread Andrew Beekhof
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote: > Hi, > > this is about a new setting for stonith mode. > > Basically, a node failure would not cause a fence - the node would be > trusted to be truly down and have self-fenced. (Certain hardware > infrastructures can guarantee this, and

Re: [Pacemaker] RFC: stonith-enabled="error-recovery"

2010-06-25 Thread Maros Timko
> Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 17:46:39 +0200 > From: Lars Marowsky-Bree > To: pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org > Subject: [Pacemaker] RFC: stonith-enabled="error-recovery" > Message-ID: <20100624154639.gf5...@suse.de> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 >

[Pacemaker] RFC: stonith-enabled="error-recovery"

2010-06-24 Thread Lars Marowsky-Bree
Hi, this is about a new setting for stonith mode. Basically, a node failure would not cause a fence - the node would be trusted to be truly down and have self-fenced. (Certain hardware infrastructures can guarantee this, and also drive the probability of split-communication down to be neglible; o