>>> Lars Marowsky-Bree <[email protected]> schrieb am 08.11.2012 um 09:07 in 
>>> Nachricht
<[email protected]>:
> On 2012-11-07T12:51:25, Ulrich Windl <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> > I agree that one shouldn't have to do it, but I've seen cases (two node 
> cluster with quorum-policy=ignore) where one node was down while the 
> "cluster" 
> wanted to fence both nodes. So when the other node goes up, nodes will shoot 
> each other.
> > My expectation was that the "cluster" would see that the other node is down 
> and hasn't to be shot. Likewise it looks stupid if the remaining node insists 
> of being shot, but refuses to shoot itself.
> 
> Well, it doesn't see that the "other node" is down, it has to make sure
> by shooting it. But the surviving node wanting to shoot itself shouldn't
> happen (unless you then have something like a stop failure there, too).
> 
> Was this reported?

Hi Lars,

no, because I wasn't there when the situation developed; I was just called when 
the situation was there already. Despite of that we'll move to SLES11 SP2 ASAP.

Regards,
Ulrich

> 
> 
> Regards,
>     Lars



 

_______________________________________________
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