Do you have an idea whats the best place to implement self fencing? Can we simply use softdog inside the quorum service (to trigger a reboot when we lose quorum? or is that too simple? Or is fenced the better place?
- Dietmar > > But what I've heard so far is that many users do not understand > > why fencing is required, and worse, they do not configure and test > > it correctly. > > > > So the question is if we can combine those approaches? Or is that > > mutual exclusive for some reason? > > > > It would be beneficial to have implementations that supported one or > the > other or both models at the same time. Maximum flexibility for the > user. Then the user can decide what their viewpoint is on reliability > just as I have outlined in this previous thread. If they are super > paranoid, they might use both. If they believe simplicity is superior, > they might choose self fencing. If they feel that operating in a well > defined operating environment with more complexity is better, they > could > choose that. > > Currently there are two choices 1) power fencing 2) no fencing. > > Regards > -steve > > > > - Dietmar > > > > > _______________________________________________ Openais mailing list Openais@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais