Hi, On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 03:26:52PM -0400, Chase Simms wrote: > OK. I thought pingd was used to test connectivity and could put a node > in a degraded state.
pingd only updates an node status attribute in the CIB. That attribute may then be referenced in constraints on where (and if) to run resources. > I thought suicide was valid because it was listed in the output from > stonith -L. The suicide STONITH device does work, though I don't like it because it depends on the node being mostly operational to do the work. > 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? The other node should shoot it. STONITH stands for Shoot The Other Node ... > 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? Of course not. > 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? You may stop resource depending on the attribute which pingd generates. Thanks, Dejan > 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 _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
