Hi Alex
> I see in the README this is usable for "clusters that contain up to 2
system controllers." What are the limiting factors for applying it to a
> cluster with more than 2 system controllers (where the others are
running as spares)?
The TCP arbitrator is intended for use with FMS_RELAXED_NODE_PROMOTION=1.
Otherwise, it becomes a single point of failure.
With this setting, two SCs can remain up if they can see other.
If roaming SC is enabled, consider the case where two spare SCs become
isolated in a network partition (partition 2), while existing
active/standby/arbitrator is in partition 1. We would end up with dual
actives as the SCs in partition 2 will also become active/standby.
Hope that explains it better.
Gary
On 1/10/19 12:53 pm, Gary Lee wrote:
Summary: osaf: add tcp arbitrator [#3064]
Review request for Ticket(s): 3064
Peer Reviewer(s): Minh, Hans, AndersW
Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE ***
Affected branch(es): develop
Development branch: ticket-3064
Base revision: 46e9e0f310a6c21dbc89a9ffd8bee26829342c0c
Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/userid-2226215/review
--------------------------------
Impacted area Impact y/n
--------------------------------
Docs n
Build system n
RPM/packaging n
Configuration files n
Startup scripts n
SAF services n
OpenSAF services y
Core libraries n
Samples n
Tests n
Other n
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
revision feea45602df54671c8e769f2e234b03ad6dcdaeb
Author: Gary Lee <gary....@dektech.com.au>
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2019 12:47:13 +1000
osaf: add tcp arbitrator [#3064]
Added Files:
------------
src/osaf/consensus/plugins/tcp/certificate.pem
src/osaf/consensus/plugins/tcp/key.pem
src/osaf/consensus/plugins/tcp/README
src/osaf/consensus/plugins/tcp/tcp.plugin
src/osaf/consensus/plugins/tcp/tcp_server.py
Complete diffstat:
------------------
src/osaf/consensus/plugins/tcp/README | 41 ++
src/osaf/consensus/plugins/tcp/certificate.pem | 20 +
src/osaf/consensus/plugins/tcp/key.pem | 28 ++
src/osaf/consensus/plugins/tcp/tcp.plugin | 520 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
src/osaf/consensus/plugins/tcp/tcp_server.py | 157 ++++++++
5 files changed, 766 insertions(+)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
*** LIST THE COMMAND LINE TOOLS/STEPS TO TEST YOUR CHANGES ***
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
*** PASTE COMMAND OUTPUTS / TEST RESULTS ***
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
ack from anyone
Arch Built Started Linux distro
-------------------------------------------
mips n n
mips64 n n
x86 n n
x86_64 y y
powerpc n n
powerpc64 n n
Reviewer Checklist:
-------------------
[Submitters: make sure that your review doesn't trigger any checkmarks!]
Your checkin has not passed review because (see checked entries):
___ Your RR template is generally incomplete; it has too many blank entries
that need proper data filled in.
___ You have failed to nominate the proper persons for review and push.
___ Your patches do not have proper short+long header
___ You have grammar/spelling in your header that is unacceptable.
___ You have exceeded a sensible line length in your headers/comments/text.
___ You have failed to put in a proper Trac Ticket # into your commits.
___ You have incorrectly put/left internal data in your comments/files
(i.e. internal bug tracking tool IDs, product names etc)
___ You have not given any evidence of testing beyond basic build tests.
Demonstrate some level of runtime or other sanity testing.
___ You have ^M present in some of your files. These have to be removed.
___ You have needlessly changed whitespace or added whitespace crimes
like trailing spaces, or spaces before tabs.
___ You have mixed real technical changes with whitespace and other
cosmetic code cleanup changes. These have to be separate commits.
___ You need to refactor your submission into logical chunks; there is
too much content into a single commit.
___ You have extraneous garbage in your review (merge commits etc)
___ You have giant attachments which should never have been sent;
Instead you should place your content in a public tree to be pulled.
___ You have too many commits attached to an e-mail; resend as threaded
commits, or place in a public tree for a pull.
___ You have resent this content multiple times without a clear indication
of what has changed between each re-send.
___ You have failed to adequately and individually address all of the
comments and change requests that were proposed in the initial review.
___ You have a misconfigured ~/.gitconfig file (i.e. user.name, user.email etc)
___ Your computer have a badly configured date and time; confusing the
the threaded patch review.
___ Your changes affect IPC mechanism, and you don't present any results
for in-service upgradability test.
___ Your changes affect user manual and documentation, your patch series
do not contain the patch that updates the Doxygen manual.
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
