On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Chase Simms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OK. I thought pingd was used to test connectivity and could put a node > in a degraded state. > > I thought suicide was valid because it was listed in the output from > stonith -L. > > So, if pingd does not control killing a node, and STONITH does not > support suicide; how does a node know to shut down when there is a > network problem? > > Is the idea that if node "A" loses it's network connection, no clients > can reach it, so it's OK for both nodes to be active?
It's not Ok to have both sides Active when you have a network problem. And that's where STONITH comes in, but you have to have a reliable link to a STONITH device, i.e. a device that can power off a disconnected node. I don't know what would be the good choice of a STONITH device for your cases where you have node clusters located in geographically separated places. Usually people use Heartbear for building HA clusters on one site, not for DR. > > If I do give up my dreams of DR and use a cross-over, will a node fail > automatically when it's public interface fails? > > Thanks, > Chase > > >>>> "Serge Dubrouski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 7/15/2008 2:14 PM >>> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 11:40 AM, Chase Simms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> If it is the link between locations, the server that is not located > with >> the 3rd party address used by pingd would no longer be able to reach > it. > > pingd has nothing to do with STONITH. pingd can control where resource > shall be started but it can't control what server has to die. > >> >> >>>>> "Serge Dubrouski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 7/15/2008 11:34 AM >>> >> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 9:04 AM, Chase Simms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> I have a cluster set up and working except STONITH. Which means >> it's >>> unmanageable and not fault tolerant. I have multiple fibre >> connections >>> between two geographically separated locations. I want to have one >> node >>> at each location for disaster recovery. This means I cannot use a >>> cross-over or serial connection. I'm really hoping to parlay this >> into >>> a proof of concept to sell the idea of using the other site as a > hot >>> site for critical systems. >>> >>> Right now I have them set up as: >>> >>> server 1 vlan 7 -> server 2 vlan 7 (public interface, shared IP) >>> server 1 vlan 8 -> server 2 vlan 8 (DRBD replication, heartbeat) >>> >>> How can I configure STONITH to suicide when a connection goes down? >> >> I don't think that this is possible. How would you know which one of >> the servers has to suicide if your network connection dies? >> >>> Right now, when I take down one interface, the ping still gets >> through >>> the other interface. >>> >>> It occurred to me to create a VLAN that will not route for the >> private >>> interfaces. But that will be very difficult to push through. Is >> there >>> another way? >>> >>> Thank you, >>> Chase >>> >>> >>> >>> The information in this email is intended for the sole use of the >>> addressees and may be confidential and subject to protection under >> the >>> law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified >> that >>> any distribution or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. > If >> you >>> have received this message in error, please reply and delete your >> copy. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Linux-HA mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha >>> See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Serge Dubrouski. >> _______________________________________________ >> Linux-HA mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha >> See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems >> >> >> The information in this email is intended for the sole use of the >> addressees and may be confidential and subject to protection under > the >> law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified > that >> any distribution or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If > you >> have received this message in error, please reply and delete your > copy. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Linux-HA mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha >> See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems >> > > > > -- > Serge Dubrouski. > _______________________________________________ > Linux-HA mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems > > > The information in this email is intended for the sole use of the > addressees and may be confidential and subject to protection under the > law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that > any distribution or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you > have received this message in error, please reply and delete your copy. > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-HA mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems > -- Serge Dubrouski. _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
