On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Ulrich Windl <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> 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.
Remember crm/hb_report can be used after the problem occurred (or even after it has been resolved). Please dont be shy in reporting things like this, its the only way to get them fixed. > 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 _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
