Hi, On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 01:43:34PM +0100, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote: > On 2008-01-18T13:26:47, Thomas Glanzmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I have a two node cluster. I use external/ipmi which needs one instance > > per node. A node that is misbehaving can't stonith itself, can it? > > If the node fails, and the other side needs STONITH, the resource > will be started in that partition automatically. > > The location constraints don't hurt, but you don't need them. > > > Is linux-ha so smart to see that the one stonith resource has to run on > > the one node and the other on the other node? > > STONITH resources get started before any STONITH operation is performed, > which has roughly the same effect. > > And yes, on a stop failure, a node might decide to fence itself too. As > stonithd is network aware, it doesn't matter where exactly in the > cluster the STONITH resource runs.
http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1752 According to this, it does matter. There really is a check in stonithd which prevents a node to stonith itself. So, I'd say that there should be a location constraint which says not to run a stonith resource on the same node which is to be fenced by that stonith resource. Otherwise, the stonith resource is going to be started, but it won't do its job should the need arise. Thanks, Dejan > > Regards, > Lars > > -- > Teamlead Kernel, SuSE Labs, Research and Development > SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG N?rnberg) > "Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-HA mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
