Re: [Pacemaker] crmd does abort if a stopped node is specified
On Thu, 8 May 2014 09:58:41 +1000 Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net wrote: node $id=131 vm01 node $id=132 vm02 (snip) Is the method of setting up ID of the node which has not participated in a cluster using a corosync stack like this? I don;t know how crmsh works, sorry $id= maps directly to the id attribute in the XML. The name maps to the uname attribute. So those examples would generate the XML node id=131 uname=vm01/node node id=132 uname=vm02/node Not sure if that answers the original question. -- // Kristoffer Grönlund // kgronl...@suse.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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
Re: [Pacemaker] crmd does abort if a stopped node is specified
Hi, Andrew
I read the code.
In the present processing, a setup of startup-fencing is read only
once after starting.
https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pacemaker/blob/master/lib/pengine/unpack.c#L455
In Pacemaker-1.0, whenever unpack_nodes() was called, a setup was read.
https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pacemaker-1.0/blob/master/lib/pengine/unpack.c#L194
While a cluster starts, a setup of startup-fencing cannot be changed.
It seems to it that the function has deteriorated.
I made the correction to this problem below.
https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pacemaker/pull/512
Will it be good in this fix?
Regards,
Yusuke
2014-05-08 15:59 GMT+09:00 Yusuke Iida yusk.i...@gmail.com:
Hi, Andrew
I am the method shown above and made a setup read.
crmd was able to be added as a node of OFFLINE, without core dumping.
However, the node of OFFLINE added although startup-fencing=false
was set up has been fenced.
I do not expect fence here.
Why is it that startup-fencing=false is not effective?
I attach crm_report when a problem occurs.
The version of used Pacemaker is as follows.
https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pacemaker/commit/9fa1ed36e373768e84bee47b5d21b0bf80f608b7
Regards,
Yusuke
2014-05-08 8:58 GMT+09:00 Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net:
On 7 May 2014, at 7:53 pm, Yusuke Iida yusk.i...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, Andrew
I would also like to describe the node which has not participated in a
cluster to a crmsh file.
I understood that uuid was required for a setup of a node as follows
from this mail thread.
# cat node.crm
### Cluster Option ###
property no-quorum-policy=ignore \
stonith-enabled=true \
startup-fencing=false \
crmd-transition-delay=2s
node $id=131 vm01
node $id=132 vm02
(snip)
Is the method of setting up ID of the node which has not participated
in a cluster using a corosync stack like this?
I don;t know how crmsh works, sorry
It is sufficient to describe the nodelist and nodeid to corosync.conf?
That is my understanding, yes.
# cat corosync.conf
(snip)
nodelist {
node {
ring0_addr: 192.168.101.131
ring1_addr: 192.168.102.131
nodeid: 131
}
node {
ring0_addr: 192.168.101.132
ring1_addr: 192.168.101.132
nodeid: 132
}
}
Regards,
Yusuke
2014-04-24 12:33 GMT+09:00 Kazunori INOUE kazunori.ino...@gmail.com:
2014-04-23 19:32 GMT+09:00 Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net:
On 23 Apr 2014, at 7:17 pm, Kazunori INOUE kazunori.ino...@gmail.com
wrote:
2014-04-22 0:45 GMT+09:00 David Vossel dvos...@redhat.com:
- Original Message -
From: Kazunori INOUE kazunori.ino...@gmail.com
To: pm pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2014 4:49:42 AM
Subject: [Pacemaker] crmd does abort if a stopped node is specified
Hi,
crmd does abort if I load CIB which specified a stopped node.
# crm_mon -1
Last updated: Fri Apr 18 11:51:36 2014
Last change: Fri Apr 18 11:51:30 2014
Stack: corosync
Current DC: pm103 (3232261519) - partition WITHOUT quorum
Version: 1.1.11-cf82673
1 Nodes configured
0 Resources configured
Online: [ pm103 ]
# cat test.cli
node pm103
node pm104
# crm configure load update test.cli
Apr 18 11:52:42 pm103 crmd[11672]:error: crm_int_helper:
Characters left over after parsing 'pm104': 'pm104'
Apr 18 11:52:42 pm103 crmd[11672]:error: crm_abort: crm_get_peer:
Triggered fatal assert at membership.c:420 : id 0 || uname != NULL
Apr 18 11:52:42 pm103 pacemakerd[11663]:error: child_waitpid:
Managed process 11672 (crmd) dumped core
(gdb) bt
#0 0x0033da432925 in raise () from /lib64/libc.so.6
#1 0x0033da434105 in abort () from /lib64/libc.so.6
#2 0x7f30241b7027 in crm_abort (file=0x7f302440b0b3
membership.c, function=0x7f302440b5d0 crm_get_peer, line=420,
assert_condition=0x7f302440b27e id 0 || uname != NULL, do_core=1,
do_fork=0) at utils.c:1177
#3 0x7f30244048ee in crm_get_peer (id=0, uname=0x0) at
membership.c:420
#4 0x7f3024402238 in crm_peer_uname (uuid=0x113e7c0 pm104) at
is the uuid for your cluster nodes supposed to be the same as the
uname? We're treating the uuid in this situation as if it should be a
number, which it clearly is not.
OK, I got it.
By the way, is there a method to know id of the node before starting
pacemaker?
Normally it comes from corosync, so not really :-(
It seems the only way is to specify the nodeid to nodelist directive
in corosync.conf.
nodelist {
node {
ring0_addr: 192.168.101.143
nodeid: 3
}
node {
ring0_addr: 192.168.101.144
nodeid: 4
}
}
Thanks!
-- Vossel
cluster.c:386
#5 0x0043afbd in abort_transition_graph
(abort_priority=100, abort_action=tg_restart, abort_text=0x44d2f4
Non-status change, reason=0x113e4b0, fn=0x44df07 te_update_diff,
line=382) at te_utils.c:518
#6 0x0043caa4 in te_update_diff (event=0x10f2240
cib_diff_notify, msg=0x1137660) at te_callbacks.c:382
#7 0x7f302461d1bc in
Re: [Pacemaker] [Question] About quorum-policy=freeze and promote.
Why are you using ssh as stonith? i don't think the fencing is working because your nodes are in unclean state 2014-05-08 5:37 GMT+02:00 renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp: 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? * 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 -- esta es mi vida e me la vivo hasta que dios quiera ___ 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
Re: [Pacemaker] [Question] About quorum-policy=freeze and promote.
Hi Emmanuel, Why are you using ssh as stonith? i don't think the fencing is working because your nodes are in unclean state No, STONITH is not carried out because all nodes lose quorum. This is right movement of Pacemaker. It is an example to use STONITH of ssh. Best Regards, Hideo Yamauchi. --- On Thu, 2014/5/8, emmanuel segura emi2f...@gmail.com wrote: Why are you using ssh as stonith? i don't think the fencing is working because your nodes are in unclean state 2014-05-08 5:37 GMT+02:00 renayama19661...@ybb.ne.jp: 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? * 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 -- esta es mi vida e me la vivo hasta que dios quiera ___ 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] Require pointers on how to build an rpm for a specific Pacemaker Release.
Hi , I was able to build an rpm from current sources of Pacemaker on Cent OS 6.5 . I followed steps mentioned at http://blog.clusterlabs.org/blog/2013/Pacemaker-1-dot-1-10-final/ . I wanted to know how to make change to a specific Pacemaker release, then compile, and build rpm. i.e is there a way to download Pacemaker Release 1.1.11 source code , make some changes locally in the code , compile these changes and build the pacemaker rpm . Regards, Monali ___ 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] [Problem][pacemaker1.0] The probe may not be carried out by difference in cib information of probe.
Hi All, We confirmed a problem when we performed clean up of the Master/Slave resource in Pacemaker1.0. When this problem occurs, probe processing is not carried out. I registered the problem with Bugzilla. * http://bugs.clusterlabs.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5211 In addition, I wrote the method of clean up avoiding a problem for Bugzilla. But this method may not be usable depending on the combination of resources. I request improvement if I can revise this problem in Pacemaker1.0 in community. * But this problem is improved in Pacemaker1.1 and does not seem to occur. 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] Question about Pacemaker resource configuration troubleshooting
Hi, I created Pacemaker resource configuration file, but it does not accepts it. It complanes: /home/jnikom/Kiva/dev/Prod/flvr/pace loadConstraintsXML clu_con_init_2014_05_08_001.xml error: unpack_rsc_op:No further recovery can be attempted for mysqlres: stop action failed with 'not installed' (5) error: unpack_rsc_op:No further recovery can be attempted for mysqlres: stop action failed with 'not installed' (5) error: unpack_rsc_op:No further recovery can be attempted for mysqlres: stop action failed with 'not installed' (5) error: native_create_actions:Resource mysqlres (lsb::my_db_res_master) is active on 3 nodes attempting recovery /home/jnikom/Kiva/dev/Prod/flvr/pace Is there any tool that could help to find out what specifically Pacemaker does not like in the resource configuration? Best regards, Jacob Nikom ___ 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
Re: [Pacemaker] Question about Pacemaker resource configuration troubleshooting
On 9 May 2014, at 11:59 am, Jacob Nikom jni...@kivasystems.com wrote: Hi, I created Pacemaker resource configuration file, but it does not accepts it. It complanes: /home/jnikom/Kiva/dev/Prod/flvr/pace loadConstraintsXML clu_con_init_2014_05_08_001.xml error: unpack_rsc_op:No further recovery can be attempted for mysqlres: stop action failed with 'not installed' (5) error: unpack_rsc_op:No further recovery can be attempted for mysqlres: stop action failed with 'not installed' (5) error: unpack_rsc_op:No further recovery can be attempted for mysqlres: stop action failed with 'not installed' (5) error: native_create_actions:Resource mysqlres (lsb::my_db_res_master) is active on 3 nodes attempting recovery /home/jnikom/Kiva/dev/Prod/flvr/pace Is there any tool that could help to find out what specifically Pacemaker does not like in the resource configuration? Either the agent isn't on all nodes or its the agent that doesn't like your configuration. Some tool it requires is probably missing. Best regards, Jacob Nikom ___ 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 signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail ___ 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
Re: [Pacemaker] Require pointers on how to build an rpm for a specific Pacemaker Release.
On 9 May 2014, at 2:32 am, Monali Porob monali.po...@huawei.com wrote:
Hi ,
I was able to build an rpm from current sources of Pacemaker on Cent OS 6.5
. I followed steps mentioned at
http://blog.clusterlabs.org/blog/2013/Pacemaker-1-dot-1-10-final/ .
I wanted to know how to make change to a specific Pacemaker release, then
compile, and build rpm.
i.e is there a way to download Pacemaker Release 1.1.11 source code , make
some changes locally in the code , compile these changes and build the
pacemaker rpm .
git co Pacemaker-${someversion}
make rpm
Regards,
Monali
___
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
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
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
Re: [Pacemaker] [Question] About quorum-policy=freeze and promote.
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 signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail ___ 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
Re: [Pacemaker] [Question] About quorum-policy=freeze and promote.
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 signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail ___ 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
