On 26/10/11 17:14, [email protected] wrote:
> Hi Tim,
>
> I spoke of ocfs2.pcmk , and I configured all the things as documented
> so that we got a unique cluster "pcmk" for both stacks : ocfs2 and
> pacemaker,
> and did many tests and "tuning" to make it work, but ... it was defintely
> not
> working.

Ah, OK, I misinterpreted your last email, sorry.

> I completely do agree that making a cluster ocfs2 "besides" the cluster
> pacemaker
> will definetely not work , but the configuration with dlm and ocfs2 pcmk
> stack
> are specific to work under pacemaker (so there is no ocfs2.conf, the name
> of
> the ocfs2 cluster is "pcmk") , but it does not work at all on RHEL6, it
> perhaps
> was working on previous RH releases, but Oracle told me that (in fall
> 2010)
> they had not "updated" even "tested" the ocfs2.pcmk stack to work with
> Pacemaker on RHEL6 ... but perhaps things have been done now (I doubt)

I assume it worked on Fedora ~11 (which that previous Clusters from 
Scratch refers to), and I know it's well tested on SLES ;-) but like I 
said, I can't speak for OCFS2 on Pacemaker on RHEL.

Regards,

Tim

>
> Regards
> Alain
>
>
>
> De :    Tim Serong<[email protected]>
> A :     [email protected]
> Date :  26/10/2011 08:00
> Objet : Re: [Linux-HA] PCMK + OCFS2
> Envoyé par :    [email protected]
>
>
>
> On 26/10/11 16:42, [email protected] wrote:
>> Hi Nick,
>>
>> I spent e few weeks to try to make this stack ocfs2.pcmk working with
>> pacemaker/corosync stack
>> last fall 2010, and this stack was definitely not working on RH. Many
>> conflicts
>> between ocfs2 clustering and pacemaker clustering leading to both nodes
>> killed
>> or at least ocfs2 fs read-only whereas the other node was fenced, etc. I
>> give up
>> on this stack.
>> I 'm very curious to know if it works now (at least on RHEL6) but I
> don't
>> think so
>> as the response of Oracle last year was that they did not work on this
>> stack again.
>> But perhaps they have now ...
>
> You can't (or at least, seriously shouldn't - that way lies madness)
> have both Pacemaker and O2CB simultaneously managing the cluster.
>
> I can't speak for OCFS2 support on Debian or RHEL, but I can suggest
> reading:
>
> * The previous version of Clusters from Scratch (labelled "OpenAIS") at
> http://www.clusterlabs.org/wiki/Documentation (this is old, but refers
> to OCFS2).
>
> * The relevant chapter of the SLE HA documentation:
> http://www.novell.com/documentation/sle_ha/book_sleha/?page=/documentation/sle_ha/book_sleha/data/part_storage.html
>
>
> * Lars' blog post about using clone-of-group configuration in Pacemaker:
> http://www.advogato.org/person/lmb/diary/104.html
>
> HTH,
>
> Tim
>
>>
>> Let us know.
>> Thanks a lot
>> Alain Moullé
>>
>>
>>
>> De :    Nick Khamis<[email protected]>
>> A :     General Linux-HA mailing list<[email protected]>
>> Date :  25/10/2011 20:14
>> Objet : [Linux-HA] PCMK + OCFS2
>> Envoyé par :    [email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello Everyone,
>>
>> Moving forward, I noticed that there was not much documentation
>> regarding getting the pcmk stack working
>> with ocfs2. I have the configuration up and running however, missed
>> the part regarding getting what is required
>> for pcmk+ocfs support (to get ocf:pacemaker:controld +
>> ocf:pacemaker:o2cb working).
>>
>> Everything is build from source using the latest version of Glue, RA,
>> PCMK, and OpenAIS. OCFS2 works fine
>> manually, and now I am trying to get corosync to handle it. This is on
>> a prototype environment right now using
>> Debian Squeeze however, will be using an EL like Red Hat for
>> production. No stonith is required just yet, but if
>> the documentation includes that as well it would be beneficial very
> soon.
>>
>> I did find:
>>
> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/pacemaker/attachments/20091013/b7980710/attachment.bat
>
>>
>> from
>> 2009 but reckon a lot has changed since then?
>>
>> Thanks in Advance as Always,
>>
>> Nick from Toronto.
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

Reply via email to