Hi Andrew, > > Okay. > > I wish this problem is revised by the next release. > > crm_report?
I confirmed a problem again in PM1.2-rc1 and registered in Bugzilla. * http://bugs.clusterlabs.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5212 Towards Bugzilla, I attached the crm_report file. Best Regards, Hideo Yamauchi. --- On Fri, 2014/5/9, Andrew Beekhof <and...@beekhof.net> wrote: > > On 9 May 2014, at 2:05 pm, renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp wrote: > > > Hi Andrew, > > > > Thank you for comment. > > > >>> Is it responsibility of the resource agent side to prevent a state of > >>> these plural Master? > >> > >> No. > >> > >> In this scenario, no nodes have quorum and therefor no additional > >> instances should have been promoted. Thats the definition of "freeze" :) > >> Even if one partition DID have quorum, no instances should have been > >> promoted without fencing occurring first. > > > > Okay. > > I wish this problem is revised by the next release. > > crm_report? > > > > > Many Thanks! > > Hideo Yamauchi. > > > > --- On Fri, 2014/5/9, Andrew Beekhof <and...@beekhof.net> wrote: > > > >> > >> On 8 May 2014, at 1:37 pm, renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp wrote: > >> > >>> Hi All, > >>> > >>> I composed Master/Slave resource of three nodes that set > >>> quorum-policy="freeze". > >>> (I use Stateful in Master/Slave resource.) > >>> > >>> --------------------------------- > >>> Current DC: srv01 (3232238280) - partition with quorum > >>> Version: 1.1.11-830af67 > >>> 3 Nodes configured > >>> 9 Resources configured > >>> > >>> > >>> Online: [ srv01 srv02 srv03 ] > >>> > >>> Resource Group: grpStonith1 > >>> prmStonith1-1 (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv02 > >>> Resource Group: grpStonith2 > >>> prmStonith2-1 (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv01 > >>> Resource Group: grpStonith3 > >>> prmStonith3-1 (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv01 > >>> Master/Slave Set: msPostgresql [pgsql] > >>> Masters: [ srv01 ] > >>> Slaves: [ srv02 srv03 ] > >>> Clone Set: clnPingd [prmPingd] > >>> Started: [ srv01 srv02 srv03 ] > >>> --------------------------------- > >>> > >>> > >>> Master resource starts in all nodes when I interrupt the internal > >>> communication of all nodes. > >>> > >>> --------------------------------- > >>> Node srv02 (3232238290): UNCLEAN (offline) > >>> Node srv03 (3232238300): UNCLEAN (offline) > >>> Online: [ srv01 ] > >>> > >>> Resource Group: grpStonith1 > >>> prmStonith1-1 (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv02 > >>> Resource Group: grpStonith2 > >>> prmStonith2-1 (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv01 > >>> Resource Group: grpStonith3 > >>> prmStonith3-1 (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv01 > >>> Master/Slave Set: msPostgresql [pgsql] > >>> Masters: [ srv01 ] > >>> Slaves: [ srv02 srv03 ] > >>> Clone Set: clnPingd [prmPingd] > >>> Started: [ srv01 srv02 srv03 ] > >>> (snip) > >>> Node srv01 (3232238280): UNCLEAN (offline) > >>> Node srv03 (3232238300): UNCLEAN (offline) > >>> Online: [ srv02 ] > >>> > >>> Resource Group: grpStonith1 > >>> prmStonith1-1 (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv02 > >>> Resource Group: grpStonith2 > >>> prmStonith2-1 (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv01 > >>> Resource Group: grpStonith3 > >>> prmStonith3-1 (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv01 > >>> Master/Slave Set: msPostgresql [pgsql] > >>> Masters: [ srv01 srv02 ] > >>> Slaves: [ srv03 ] > >>> Clone Set: clnPingd [prmPingd] > >>> Started: [ srv01 srv02 srv03 ] > >>> (snip) > >>> Node srv01 (3232238280): UNCLEAN (offline) > >>> Node srv02 (3232238290): UNCLEAN (offline) > >>> Online: [ srv03 ] > >>> > >>> Resource Group: grpStonith1 > >>> prmStonith1-1 (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv02 > >>> Resource Group: grpStonith2 > >>> prmStonith2-1 (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv01 > >>> Resource Group: grpStonith3 > >>> prmStonith3-1 (stonith:external/ssh): Started srv01 > >>> Master/Slave Set: msPostgresql [pgsql] > >>> Masters: [ srv01 srv03 ] > >>> Slaves: [ srv02 ] > >>> Clone Set: clnPingd [prmPingd] > >>> Started: [ srv01 srv02 srv03 ] > >>> --------------------------------- > >>> > >>> I think even if the cluster loses Quorum, being "promote" the Master / > >>> Slave resource that's specification of Pacemaker. > >>> > >>> Is it responsibility of the resource agent side to prevent a state of > >>> these plural Master? > >> > >> No. > >> > >> In this scenario, no nodes have quorum and therefor no additional > >> instances should have been promoted. Thats the definition of "freeze" :) > >> Even if one partition DID have quorum, no instances should have been > >> promoted without fencing occurring first. > >> > >>> * I think that drbd-RA has those functions. > >>> * But, there is no function in Stateful-RA. > >>> * As an example, I think that the mechanism such as drbd is necessary by > >>> all means when I make a resource of Master/Slave newly. > >>> > >>> Will my understanding be wrong? > >>> > >>> Best Regards, > >>> Hideo Yamauchi. > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org > >>> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker > >>> > >>> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > >>> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf > >>> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org