On Wed, 18 Sep 2013, Digimer wrote:
On 18/09/13 23:16, Fabio M. Di Nitto wrote:
On 09/19/2013 12:47 AM, David Lang wrote:
I'm trying to get a cluster up and running without using multicast, I've
made my cluster.conf be the following, but the systems are still sending
to the multicast address and not seeing each other as a result.
Is there something that I did wrong in creating the cman segment of the
file? unforutunantly the cluster.conf man page just referrs to the
corosync.conf man page, but the two files use different config styles.
If not, what else do I need to do to disable multicast and just use udpu?
<cman two_node="1" expected_votes="1">
<totem vsftype="none" token="5000"
token_retransmits_before_loss_const="10" join="60" consensus="4800"
rrp_mode="none" transport="udpu">
<interface ringnumber="0" bindnetaddr="10.1.18.0" mcastport="5405"
ttl="1" >
<member memberaddr="10.1.18.177" />
<member memberaddr="10.1.18.178" />
</interface>
</totem>
</cman>
You don't need all of that...
<cman two_node="1" expected_votes="1" transport="udpu"/>
There is no need to specify anything else. memberaddresses et all will
be determined by the node names.
Fabio
To add to what Fabio said;
You've not setup fencing. This is not support and, when you use
rgmanager, clvmd and/or gfs2, the first time a fence is called your
cluster will block.
When a node stops responding, the other node will call fenced to eject
it from the cluster. One of the first things fenced does is inform dlm,
which stops giving out locks until fenced tells it that the node is
gone. If the node can't be fenced, it will obviously never successfully
be fenced, so dlm will never start offering locks. This leaves
rgmanager, cman and gfs2 locked up (by design).
In my case the nodes have no shared storage. I'm using pacemaker/corosync to
move an IP from one box to another (and in one case, I'm moving a dummy resource
that between two alerting boxes, where both boxes see all logs and calculate
alerts, but I want to have only the active box send out the alert)
In all these cases, split-brain situations are annoying, but not critical
If both alerting boxes send an alert, I get identical alerts.
If both boxes have the same IP, it's not great, but since either one will
respond, the impact consists of any TCP connections being broken each time the
ARP race winner changes for a source box or gateway (and since most cases
involve UDP traffic, there is no impact at all in those cases)
This is about as simple a use case as you can get :-)
David Lang
_______________________________________________
Openais mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais
