Hi, Dejan Muhamedagic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi, > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:52:16AM +0900, Keisuke MORI wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Johan Hoeke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > Dejan Muhamedagic wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 05:59:23PM +0100, Johan Hoeke wrote: >> >>> LS, >> >>> >> >>> Anybody here using some kind of brocade fencing with heartbeat like >> >>> RedHat offers in its cluster software? I found this reference: >> >>> http://linux.die.net/man/8/fence_brocade >> >>> >> >>> It turns out to be the attached perl script. Got it from >> >>> http://mirror.centos.org/centos/4/csgfs/i386/RPMS/fence-1.32.50-2.el4.centos.1.i686.rpm >> >>> >> >>> Would it be possible to use this as an external stonith script? >> >> >> >> No, because stonith is about fencing nodes and this would be >> >> fencing resources. >> > >> > Point taken! >> >> Fencing nodes by isolating I/O is very interesting idea though. > > It's a bit of a terminology problem, but it boils to the same > thing. Fencing a resource means building a fence around it as > your sf-ex does. Fencing a node is done by bringing it down so > that it can't connect to any resource anymore. Stonith is used > only on the node level. I believe that fence_brocade is the node level fencing, but am I wrong? In my understanding, fence_brocade does fencing by bringing all the Fibre connections of the node down to protect the data instead of turning the power off. It's a different approach from the SF-EX to avoid the data corruption but I think it's an interesting alternative. > >> > > I think that right now the only way would be to implement an RA >> >> which would fence resource. That's what Junko Ikeda and NTT >> >> people did: >> >> >> >> http://lists.linux-ha.org/pipermail/linux-ha/2007-October/028388.html >> > >> > Good stuff, thanks you for pointing it out. And mr Ikeda and NTT for >> > sharing! >> > >> >> >> >> I don't know why their code was not included in Heartbeat. This >> >> is an important issue, so it should get more attention. >> > >> > Agreed! >> >> What can I do to make it included in Heartbeat? (we call it as "SF-EX") >> >> I and my colleagues would be really happy if it is included >> as a standard component in Heartbeat and available for everyone. > > I'll try to test it and take a look at the code. There was also > some longish discussion on the list about it, which I didn't > follow very closely. Were there any technical issues unresolved? I remember that the discussion point was that such functionality should be implemented as a quorum plugin from the Heartbeat design. But as far as we studied, SF-EX can not be implemented as a quorum plugin because the quorum plugin is not resource-aware and therefore it can not guarantee to avoid a duplicate invocation of resources. Maybe we have just short knowledge of quorum though... So we believe that SF-EX can be included as it is as one of the options for protecting the data of resources. > Does anybody use sf-ex? > > There's another big contribution of yours in the queue: procd. > Since it depends on both the CRM and heartbeat and since the two > are not anymore in the same development tree we'll have to fix > the Makefile and most probably the include statements. Thank you for remembering it. Actually we're just working on updating procd now to adapt to Pacemaker and I'll post it very soon. Regards, Keisuke MORI NTT DATA Intellilink Corporation _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
