>>> Dejan Muhamedagic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 25.10.2007 11:17 >>> >> >> One per machine and resticted to run on the other...what have you thought? >> ;-)) > >That should suffice. BTW, I don't think this (don't wanna kill >meself) is a very serious issue, because a typical situation is >that another node does a reset.
Hi Dejan, I agree with you. The "problem" arises when I get a failure on the monitor action of the stonith plugin, failcount and the corresponding calculation forces the stonith resource to be moved to exactly that node which has to be shot. My intent is to have a fallback situation in which the stonith plugin can (!) be moved to the node which has to be killed. As far as I understand it now: If this would happen, I'll see the stonith resource moved to the other node, feel happy about the nice failover mechanisms but the stonith agent will prevent to shoot itself. In this case I can get rid of the whole failover mechanism. This is the motivation to discuss about it. Happy digging Andreas Mock _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
