Thanks for reply Dejan, > > > No, there is no coordination between nodes. All of them will try > to reset the node. >
if All of them will try then dont you think it can lead to multiple reset? it's not good right?? > > Thanks, > > Dejan > > > Regards, > > > > On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Dejan Muhamedagic <deja...@fastmail.fm > >wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 11:07:18AM +0530, Romi Verma wrote: > > > > Dejan please reply , how do we set priority?? > > > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Andrew Beekhof <beek...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 06:38, Romi Verma <romi3rd...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > Thanks a lot Andrew for your reply, > > > > > > i have another question on stonith. i have configured sbd stonith > and > > > > > riloe > > > > > > stonith. can i set the order of execution. say i want riloe to > get > > > > > executed > > > > > > first and if it fails then sbd to get executed. should i set > > > priority?? > > > > > > > > > > I think you can, but dejan has the details on how > > > > > > Set the priority attribute for the stonith resource (small > > > integer). Resources with lower priority start earlier. > > > > > > This works only with pacemaker v1.x. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Dejan > > > > > > > > > it seems to me that suse 11 follows "or" approach , like if one > > > stonith > > > > > > fails then only execute another stonith. is there any way to make > it > > > > > "and" , > > > > > > > > > > no, thats generally a bad idea and results in worse reliability > than a > > > > > single device. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i mean to say even if first stonith pass , execute second also . > > > > > > you may feel that there is no need to to execute second stonith > if > > > first > > > > > > was successful . But just for my curiosity i want to know is it > > > possible > > > > > or > > > > > > not. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > > > >> Pacemaker mailing list > > > > > >> Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org > > > > > >> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Pacemaker mailing list > > > > > > Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org > > > > > > http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Pacemaker mailing list > > > > > Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org > > > > > http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Pacemaker mailing list > > > > Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org > > > > http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Pacemaker mailing list > > > Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org > > > http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pacemaker mailing list > > Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org > > http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker > > > -- > Dejan > > _______________________________________________ > Pacemaker mailing list > Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org > http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker >
_______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
