Re: [ClusterLabs] cluster stops randomly

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi,
Thanks for reply. sure I'll send the logs next time. 
issue: for example for 2 days cluster is ok and all nodes are active and 
online, but randomly when I check cluster status on one of nodes, I notice that 
cluster is stooped and it is same on all other nodes.So I should run "pcs 
cluster start --all".
Regards,H.Yavari


  From: Jan Pokorný 
 To: users@clusterlabs.org 
 
   
On 21/05/16 04:46 +, H Yavari wrote:
> I have a cluster and it works good, but I see sometimes cluster is
> stopped on all nodes and I should start manually. pcsd service is
> running but cluster is stopped.I see the pacemaker log but I
> couldn't find any warning or error. what is the issue? 
> (stonith is disable.)

- disabled stonith/fencing not set up is high risk rather than high
  availability in majority of the cases

- is "cluster was started and stopped inadvertently" what you mean?

- please provide the part of the log around the moment cluster ceased
  to work properly plus cluster's configuration (we are not good in
  telephatic remote access yet)

-- 
Jan (Poki)
___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org


  ___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

[ClusterLabs] cluster stops randomly

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi,
I have a cluster and it works good, but I see sometimes cluster is stopped on 
all nodes and I should start manually. pcsd service is running but cluster is 
stopped.I see the pacemaker log but I couldn't find any warning or error. what 
is the issue? 
(stonith is disable.)

Regards,H.Yavari
___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

[ClusterLabs] Node attributes

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi,
How can I define a constraint for two resource based on one nodes attribute? 

For example resource X and Y are co-located based on node attribute Z.


Regards,H.Yavari
___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

Re: [ClusterLabs] Two related Cluster

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi,
Thank you for reply. 
I tested the first method "multi-site cluster". it was ok with ticket manually 
assignment. But I had issues with running Booth.I tested second method 
"constraints and attributes". I make a cluster with 4 nodes and define some 
constraints for nodes. But I have problems with node relations now.
I was searching in the docs then I found 
"http://clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html/Pacemaker_Remote/ch05.html".I
 thinks this is very close to my answer. Do you offer this solution?
Regards,H.Yavari


  From: Kristoffer Grönlund <kgronl...@suse.com>
 To: ‪H Yavari‬ ‪ <hyav...@rocketmail.com>; Cluster Labs - All topics related 
to open-source clustering welcomed <users@clusterlabs.org> 
 Sent: Wednesday, 18 May 2016, 10:36:39
 Subject: Re: [ClusterLabs] Two related Cluster
   
‪H Yavari‬ ‪ <hyav...@rocketmail.com> writes:

> Hi,
> So you think for this solution Booth is better or attribute method? I'm not 
> familiar with them so can you share your experiences with them?Many thanks.
>

I think a single cluster using node attributes should be a lot easier to
understand and maintain, so I'd recommend that solution if it works out
for you.

Cheers,
Kristoffer

-- 
// Kristoffer Grönlund
// kgronl...@suse.com

  ___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

Re: [ClusterLabs] Two related Cluster

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi,
I begin to test. So I defined 2 clusters that are include: Cluster 1: App1 and 
App3   Cluster 2: App2 and App4
Now If I want enable IPaddr as a resource on clusters, this resource will 
assign to both nodes. while ip float should run only on App3 and App4.Should I 
use constraints to limit ip float resource to only one node in each cluster? so 
I should do this for other resource too and then use Booth for CTR?Any hints or 
sample save my life :)

Regards,H.Yavari


  From: Klaus Wenninger <kwenn...@redhat.com>
 To: users@clusterlabs.org 
 Sent: Tuesday, 17 May 2016, 11:08:51
 Subject: Re: [ClusterLabs] Two related Cluster
   
On 05/17/2016 08:20 AM, ‪H Yavari‬ ‪ wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Emm I have a scenario and I'm confused. So I'm searching for the
> solutions. Can you please check this
> http://clusterlabs.org/pipermail/users/2016-April/002796.html
>
> I don't know how achieve to this? with Booth? with attribute? 2
> clusters or 1 cluster?

I would say you have 2 options:

- 1 cluster with node attributes and these dummy resources I had
described previously in the thread. (Unless
  anybody has a better idea how to tackle this).
- 2 small clusters and use booth

Which one is better depends e.g. on where your servers are located -
timing/reliability issues with certain network connections
between them?
Bringing up the booth infrastructure is of course an issue as well...

>
> Please show me a way.
>
> Many thanks.
>
> Regards,
> H.Yavari
>
>
> 
> *From:* Kristoffer Grönlund <kgronl...@suse.com>
>
>
>
> ‪H Yavari‬ ‪ <hyav...@rocketmail.com <mailto:hyav...@rocketmail.com>>
> writes:
>
> > Thank you for reply.
> > I mean when in cluster X , node A is online and node B is offline,
> in cluster Y nodes will have same status.
>
> Why do you want to have two clusters with the same set of nodes? A
> single cluster can do everything that the two clusters could. If you
> want to run certain resources on only some of the nodes, you can achieve
> this with node attributes and location constraints.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Kristoffer
>
> -- 
> // Kristoffer Grönlund
> // kgronl...@suse.com <mailto:kgronl...@suse.com>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org


___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org


  ___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

Re: [ClusterLabs] Two related Cluster

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi,
Thank you again. 
Servers are in one location. I read a few about Booth. But I'm afraid of 
ticketing. This servers are very sensitive. 
So with this situation you offer Booth or using attribute method??
Best Regards,H.Yavari
 

  From: Klaus Wenninger <kwenn...@redhat.com>
 To: users@clusterlabs.org 
 Sent: Tuesday, 17 May 2016, 11:08:51
 Subject: Re: [ClusterLabs] Two related Cluster
   
On 05/17/2016 08:20 AM, ‪H Yavari‬ ‪ wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Emm I have a scenario and I'm confused. So I'm searching for the
> solutions. Can you please check this
> http://clusterlabs.org/pipermail/users/2016-April/002796.html
>
> I don't know how achieve to this? with Booth? with attribute? 2
> clusters or 1 cluster?

I would say you have 2 options:

- 1 cluster with node attributes and these dummy resources I had
described previously in the thread. (Unless
  anybody has a better idea how to tackle this).
- 2 small clusters and use booth

Which one is better depends e.g. on where your servers are located -
timing/reliability issues with certain network connections
between them?
Bringing up the booth infrastructure is of course an issue as well...

>
> Please show me a way.
>
> Many thanks.
>
> Regards,
> H.Yavari
>
>
> 
> *From:* Kristoffer Grönlund <kgronl...@suse.com>
>
>
>
> ‪H Yavari‬ ‪ <hyav...@rocketmail.com <mailto:hyav...@rocketmail.com>>
> writes:
>
> > Thank you for reply.
> > I mean when in cluster X , node A is online and node B is offline,
> in cluster Y nodes will have same status.
>
> Why do you want to have two clusters with the same set of nodes? A
> single cluster can do everything that the two clusters could. If you
> want to run certain resources on only some of the nodes, you can achieve
> this with node attributes and location constraints.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Kristoffer
>
> -- 
> // Kristoffer Grönlund
> // kgronl...@suse.com <mailto:kgronl...@suse.com>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org


___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org


  ___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

Re: [ClusterLabs] Two related Cluster

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi,
Emm I have a scenario and I'm confused. So I'm searching for the solutions. Can 
you please check this 
http://clusterlabs.org/pipermail/users/2016-April/002796.html
I don't know how achieve to this? with Booth? with attribute? 2 clusters or 1 
cluster?
Please show me a way.
Many thanks.
Regards,H.Yavari


  From: Kristoffer Grönlund <kgronl...@suse.com>

 
   
‪H Yavari‬ ‪ <hyav...@rocketmail.com> writes:

> Thank you for reply.
> I mean when in cluster X , node A is online and node B is offline, in cluster 
> Y nodes will have same status.

Why do you want to have two clusters with the same set of nodes? A
single cluster can do everything that the two clusters could. If you
want to run certain resources on only some of the nodes, you can achieve
this with node attributes and location constraints.

Cheers,
Kristoffer

-- 
// Kristoffer Grönlund
// kgronl...@suse.com

  ___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

Re: [ClusterLabs] Two related Cluster

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Thank you for reply.
I mean when in cluster X , node A is online and node B is offline, in cluster Y 
nodes will have same status.

Regards,

  From: Kristoffer Grönlund <kgronl...@suse.com>
 
   
‪H Yavari‬ ‪ <hyav...@rocketmail.com> writes:

> Hi,
> I have a question, it is possible to make a relation between 2 Clusters?I 
> mean when a node changing occurs in one cluster, it happens on other cluster 
> too.
>

I'm not sure what you mean by a node changing, but there is booth [1]
which enables the transfer of resource ownership between multiple
clusters.

[1]: https://github.com/ClusterLabs/booth

Cheers,
Kristoffer

> It is accessible?
> Thanks for helps.
>
> Regards,H.Yavari
>
> ___
> Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

-- 
// Kristoffer Grönlund
// kgronl...@suse.com

  ___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

[ClusterLabs] Two related Cluster

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi,
I have a question, it is possible to make a relation between 2 Clusters?I mean 
when a node changing occurs in one cluster, it happens on other cluster too.

It is accessible?
Thanks for helps.

Regards,H.Yavari

___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

Re: [ClusterLabs] Moving Related Servers

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi,


Thanks for your offer. I checked this and this is a amazing solution.So I 
defined two cluster :
testcluster1:App1App2resource : IP float
testcluster2:App3App4
resource : tomcat
I know that we need to grant a ticket and manage that with Booth. But I 
couldn't understand how should I define a ticket and relation of nodes and 
clusters with the ticket. I read the mentioned doc, but I missed up. Can you 
give me one example?

Thanks so.




  From: Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com>
 
  
On 04/20/2016 12:44 AM, ‪H Yavari‬ ‪ wrote:
> You got my situation right. But I couldn't find any method to do this?
> 
> I should create one cluster with 4 node or 2 cluster with 2 node ? How I
> restrict the cluster nodes to each other!!?

Your last questions made me think of multi-site clustering using booth.
I think this might be the best solution for you.

You can configure two independent pacemaker clusters of 2 nodes each,
then use booth to ensure that one cluster has the resources at any time.
See:

http://clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1-pcs/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#idm140617279413776

This is usually done with clusters at physically separate locations, but
there's no problem with using it with two clusters in one location.

Alternatively, going along more traditional lines such as what Klaus and
I have mentioned, you could use rules and node attributes to keep the
resources where desired. You could write a custom resource agent that
would set a custom node attribute for the matching node (the start
action should set the attribute to 1, and the stop action should set the
attribute to 0; if the resource was on App 1, you'd set the attribute
for App 3, and if the resource was on App 4, you'd set the attribute for
App 4). Colocate that resource with your floating IP, and use a rule to
locate service X where the custom node attribute is 1. See:

http://clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1-pcs/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#ap-ocf

http://clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1-pcs/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#idm140617279376656

http://clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1-pcs/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#idm140617356537136

> 
> 
> *From:* Klaus Wenninger <kwenn...@redhat.com>
> *To:* users@clusterlabs.org
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 20 April 2016, 9:56:05
> *Subject:* Re: [ClusterLabs] Moving Related Servers
> 
> On 04/19/2016 04:32 PM, Ken Gaillot wrote:
>> On 04/18/2016 10:05 PM, ‪H Yavari‬ ‪ wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This is servers maps:
>>>
>>> App 3-> App 1    (Active)
>>>
>>> App 4 -> App 2  (Standby)
>>>
>>>
>>> Now App1 and App2 are in a cluster with IP failover.
>>>
>>> I need when IP failover will run and App2 will be Active node, service
>>> "X" on server App3 will be stop and App 4 will be Active node.
>>> In the other words, App1 works only with App3 and App 2 works with App 4.
>>>
>>> I have a web application on App1 and some services on App 3 (this is
>>> same for App2 and App 4)
>> This is a difficult situation to model. In particular, you could only
>> have a dependency one way -- so if we could get App 3 to fail over if
>> App 1 fails, we couldn't model the other direction (App 1 failing over
>> if App 3 fails). If each is dependent on the other, there's no way to
>> start one first.
>>
>> Is there a technical reason App 3 can work only with App 1?
>>
>> Is it possible for service "X" to stay running on both App 3 and App 4
>> all the time? If so, this becomes easier.
> Just another try to understand what you are aiming for:
> 
> You have a 2-node-cluster at the moment consisting of the nodes
> App1 & App2.
> You configured something like a master/slave-group to realize
> an active/standby scenario.
> 
> To get the servers App3 & App4 into the game we would make
> them additional pacemaker-nodes (App3 & App4).
> You now have a service X that could be running either on App3 or
> App4 (which is easy by e.g. making it dependent on a node attribute)
> and it should be running on App3 when the service-group is active
> (master in pacemaker terms) on App1 and on App4 when the
> service-group is active on App2.
> 
> The standard thing would be to collocate a service with the master-role
> (see all the DRBD examples for instance).
> We would now need a locate-x when master is located-y rule instead
> of collocation.
> I don't know any way to directly specify this.
> One - ugly though - way around I could imagine would be:
> 
> - locate service X1 on App3
> - locate service X2 on A

[ClusterLabs] Fw: Moving Related Servers

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi,


Thanks for your offer. I checked this and this is a amazing solution.So I 
defined two cluster :
testcluster1:App1App2resource : IP float
testcluster2:App3App4
resource : tomcat
I know that we need to grant a ticket and manage that with Booth. But I 
couldn't understand how should I define a ticket and relation of nodes and 
clusters with the ticket. I read the mentioned doc, but I missed up. Can you 
give me one example?

Thanks so.




  From: Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com>
 
  
On 04/20/2016 12:44 AM, ‪H Yavari‬ ‪ wrote:
> You got my situation right. But I couldn't find any method to do this?
> 
> I should create one cluster with 4 node or 2 cluster with 2 node ? How I
> restrict the cluster nodes to each other!!?

Your last questions made me think of multi-site clustering using booth.
I think this might be the best solution for you.

You can configure two independent pacemaker clusters of 2 nodes each,
then use booth to ensure that one cluster has the resources at any time.
See:

http://clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1-pcs/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#idm140617279413776

This is usually done with clusters at physically separate locations, but
there's no problem with using it with two clusters in one location.

Alternatively, going along more traditional lines such as what Klaus and
I have mentioned, you could use rules and node attributes to keep the
resources where desired. You could write a custom resource agent that
would set a custom node attribute for the matching node (the start
action should set the attribute to 1, and the stop action should set the
attribute to 0; if the resource was on App 1, you'd set the attribute
for App 3, and if the resource was on App 4, you'd set the attribute for
App 4). Colocate that resource with your floating IP, and use a rule to
locate service X where the custom node attribute is 1. See:

http://clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1-pcs/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#ap-ocf

http://clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1-pcs/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#idm140617279376656

http://clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1-pcs/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#idm140617356537136

> 
> 
> *From:* Klaus Wenninger <kwenn...@redhat.com>
> *To:* users@clusterlabs.org
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 20 April 2016, 9:56:05
> *Subject:* Re: [ClusterLabs] Moving Related Servers
> 
> On 04/19/2016 04:32 PM, Ken Gaillot wrote:
>> On 04/18/2016 10:05 PM, ‪H Yavari‬ ‪ wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This is servers maps:
>>>
>>> App 3-> App 1    (Active)
>>>
>>> App 4 -> App 2  (Standby)
>>>
>>>
>>> Now App1 and App2 are in a cluster with IP failover.
>>>
>>> I need when IP failover will run and App2 will be Active node, service
>>> "X" on server App3 will be stop and App 4 will be Active node.
>>> In the other words, App1 works only with App3 and App 2 works with App 4.
>>>
>>> I have a web application on App1 and some services on App 3 (this is
>>> same for App2 and App 4)
>> This is a difficult situation to model. In particular, you could only
>> have a dependency one way -- so if we could get App 3 to fail over if
>> App 1 fails, we couldn't model the other direction (App 1 failing over
>> if App 3 fails). If each is dependent on the other, there's no way to
>> start one first.
>>
>> Is there a technical reason App 3 can work only with App 1?
>>
>> Is it possible for service "X" to stay running on both App 3 and App 4
>> all the time? If so, this becomes easier.
> Just another try to understand what you are aiming for:
> 
> You have a 2-node-cluster at the moment consisting of the nodes
> App1 & App2.
> You configured something like a master/slave-group to realize
> an active/standby scenario.
> 
> To get the servers App3 & App4 into the game we would make
> them additional pacemaker-nodes (App3 & App4).
> You now have a service X that could be running either on App3 or
> App4 (which is easy by e.g. making it dependent on a node attribute)
> and it should be running on App3 when the service-group is active
> (master in pacemaker terms) on App1 and on App4 when the
> service-group is active on App2.
> 
> The standard thing would be to collocate a service with the master-role
> (see all the DRBD examples for instance).
> We would now need a locate-x when master is located-y rule instead
> of collocation.
> I don't know any way to directly specify this.
> One - ugly though - way around I could imagine would be:
> 
> - locate service X1 on App3
> - locate service X2 on A

Re: [ClusterLabs] Moving Related Servers

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi,
Thanks for your offer. I checked this and this is a amazing solution.So I 
defined two cluster :
testcluster1:App1App2resource : IP float
testcluster2:App3App4
resource : tomcat
I know that we need to grant a ticket and manage that with Booth. But I 
couldn't understand how should I define a ticket and relation of nodes and 
clusters with the ticket. I read the mentioned doc, but I missed up. Can you 
give me one example?

Thanks so.




  From: Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com>
 
   
On 04/20/2016 12:44 AM, ‪H Yavari‬ ‪ wrote:
> You got my situation right. But I couldn't find any method to do this?
> 
> I should create one cluster with 4 node or 2 cluster with 2 node ? How I
> restrict the cluster nodes to each other!!?

Your last questions made me think of multi-site clustering using booth.
I think this might be the best solution for you.

You can configure two independent pacemaker clusters of 2 nodes each,
then use booth to ensure that one cluster has the resources at any time.
See:

http://clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1-pcs/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#idm140617279413776

This is usually done with clusters at physically separate locations, but
there's no problem with using it with two clusters in one location.

Alternatively, going along more traditional lines such as what Klaus and
I have mentioned, you could use rules and node attributes to keep the
resources where desired. You could write a custom resource agent that
would set a custom node attribute for the matching node (the start
action should set the attribute to 1, and the stop action should set the
attribute to 0; if the resource was on App 1, you'd set the attribute
for App 3, and if the resource was on App 4, you'd set the attribute for
App 4). Colocate that resource with your floating IP, and use a rule to
locate service X where the custom node attribute is 1. See:

http://clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1-pcs/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#ap-ocf

http://clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1-pcs/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#idm140617279376656

http://clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1-pcs/html-single/Pacemaker_Explained/index.html#idm140617356537136

> 
> 
> *From:* Klaus Wenninger <kwenn...@redhat.com>
> *To:* users@clusterlabs.org
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 20 April 2016, 9:56:05
> *Subject:* Re: [ClusterLabs] Moving Related Servers
> 
> On 04/19/2016 04:32 PM, Ken Gaillot wrote:
>> On 04/18/2016 10:05 PM, ‪H Yavari‬ ‪ wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This is servers maps:
>>>
>>> App 3-> App 1    (Active)
>>>
>>> App 4 -> App 2  (Standby)
>>>
>>>
>>> Now App1 and App2 are in a cluster with IP failover.
>>>
>>> I need when IP failover will run and App2 will be Active node, service
>>> "X" on server App3 will be stop and App 4 will be Active node.
>>> In the other words, App1 works only with App3 and App 2 works with App 4.
>>>
>>> I have a web application on App1 and some services on App 3 (this is
>>> same for App2 and App 4)
>> This is a difficult situation to model. In particular, you could only
>> have a dependency one way -- so if we could get App 3 to fail over if
>> App 1 fails, we couldn't model the other direction (App 1 failing over
>> if App 3 fails). If each is dependent on the other, there's no way to
>> start one first.
>>
>> Is there a technical reason App 3 can work only with App 1?
>>
>> Is it possible for service "X" to stay running on both App 3 and App 4
>> all the time? If so, this becomes easier.
> Just another try to understand what you are aiming for:
> 
> You have a 2-node-cluster at the moment consisting of the nodes
> App1 & App2.
> You configured something like a master/slave-group to realize
> an active/standby scenario.
> 
> To get the servers App3 & App4 into the game we would make
> them additional pacemaker-nodes (App3 & App4).
> You now have a service X that could be running either on App3 or
> App4 (which is easy by e.g. making it dependent on a node attribute)
> and it should be running on App3 when the service-group is active
> (master in pacemaker terms) on App1 and on App4 when the
> service-group is active on App2.
> 
> The standard thing would be to collocate a service with the master-role
> (see all the DRBD examples for instance).
> We would now need a locate-x when master is located-y rule instead
> of collocation.
> I don't know any way to directly specify this.
> One - ugly though - way around I could imagine would be:
> 
> - locate service X1 on App3
> - locate service X2 on App4

Re: [ClusterLabs] Moving Related Servers

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

You got my situation right. But I couldn't find any method to do this?
I should create one cluster with 4 node or 2 cluster with 2 node ? How I 
restrict the cluster nodes to each other!!?


  From: Klaus Wenninger <kwenn...@redhat.com>
 To: users@clusterlabs.org 
 Sent: Wednesday, 20 April 2016, 9:56:05
 Subject: Re: [ClusterLabs] Moving Related Servers
   
On 04/19/2016 04:32 PM, Ken Gaillot wrote:
> On 04/18/2016 10:05 PM, ‪H Yavari‬ ‪ wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This is servers maps:
>>
>> App 3-> App 1    (Active)
>>
>> App 4 -> App 2  (Standby)
>>
>>
>> Now App1 and App2 are in a cluster with IP failover.
>>
>> I need when IP failover will run and App2 will be Active node, service
>> "X" on server App3 will be stop and App 4 will be Active node.
>> In the other words, App1 works only with App3 and App 2 works with App 4.
>>
>> I have a web application on App1 and some services on App 3 (this is
>> same for App2 and App 4)
> This is a difficult situation to model. In particular, you could only
> have a dependency one way -- so if we could get App 3 to fail over if
> App 1 fails, we couldn't model the other direction (App 1 failing over
> if App 3 fails). If each is dependent on the other, there's no way to
> start one first.
>
> Is there a technical reason App 3 can work only with App 1?
>
> Is it possible for service "X" to stay running on both App 3 and App 4
> all the time? If so, this becomes easier.
Just another try to understand what you are aiming for:

You have a 2-node-cluster at the moment consisting of the nodes
App1 & App2.
You configured something like a master/slave-group to realize
an active/standby scenario.

To get the servers App3 & App4 into the game we would make
them additional pacemaker-nodes (App3 & App4).
You now have a service X that could be running either on App3 or
App4 (which is easy by e.g. making it dependent on a node attribute)
and it should be running on App3 when the service-group is active
(master in pacemaker terms) on App1 and on App4 when the
service-group is active on App2.

The standard thing would be to collocate a service with the master-role
(see all the DRBD examples for instance).
We would now need a locate-x when master is located-y rule instead
of collocation.
I don't know any way to directly specify this.
One - ugly though - way around I could imagine would be:

- locate service X1 on App3
- locate service X2 on App4
- dummy service Y1 is located App1 and collocated with master-role
- dummy service Y2 is located App2 and collocated with master-role
- service X1 depends on Y1
- service X2 depends on Y2

If that somehow reflects your situation the key question now would
probably be if pengine would make the group on App2 master
if service X1 fails on App3. I would guess yes but I'm not sure.

Regards,
Klaus
>> Sorry for heavy description.
>>
>>
>> 
>> *From:* Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com>
>> *To:* users@clusterlabs.org
>> **
>> On 04/18/2016 02:34 AM, ‪H Yavari‬ ‪ wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have 4 CentOS servers (App1,App2.App3 and App4). I created a cluster
>>> for App1 and App2 with a IP float and it works well.
>>> In our infrastructure App1 works only with App3 and App2 only works with
>>> App4. I mean we have 2 server sets (App1 and App3) , (App2 and App4).
>>> So I want when server app1 is down and app2 will Online node, App3 will
>>> offline too and App4 will Online and vice versa, I mean when App3 is
>>> down and App4 will Online, App1 will offline too.
>>>
>>>
>>> How can I do with pacemaker ? we have our self service on servers so how
>>> can I user Pacemaker for monitoring these services?
>>>
>>> Thanks for reply.
>>>
>>> Regards.
>>> H.Yavari
>>
>> I'm not sure I understand your requirements.
>>
>> There's no way to tell one node to leave the cluster when another node
>> is down, and it would be a bad idea if you could: the nodes could never
>> start up, because each would wait to see the other before starting; and
>> in your cluster, two nodes shutting down would make the cluster lose
>> quorum, so the other nodes would refuse to run any resources.
>>
>> However, it is usually possible to use constraints to enforce any
>> desired behavior. So even those the node might not leave the cluster,
>> you could make the cluster not place any resources on that node.
>>
>> Can you give more information about your resources and what nodes they
>> are allowed to run on? What makes

Re: [ClusterLabs] Moving Related Servers

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi,
This is servers maps:
App 3-> App 1    (Active)
App 4 -> App 2   (Standby)


Now App1 and App2 are in a cluster with IP failover. 

I need when IP failover will run and App2 will be Active node, service "X" on 
server App3 will be stop and App 4 will be Active node.In the other words, App1 
works only with App3 and App 2 works with App 4.
I have a web application on App1 and some services on App 3 (this is same for 
App2 and App 4)

Sorry for heavy description.


  From: Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com>
 To: users@clusterlabs.org 

On 04/18/2016 02:34 AM, ‪H Yavari‬ ‪ wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have 4 CentOS servers (App1,App2.App3 and App4). I created a cluster
> for App1 and App2 with a IP float and it works well.
> In our infrastructure App1 works only with App3 and App2 only works with
> App4. I mean we have 2 server sets (App1 and App3) , (App2 and App4).
> So I want when server app1 is down and app2 will Online node, App3 will
> offline too and App4 will Online and vice versa, I mean when App3 is
> down and App4 will Online, App1 will offline too.
> 
> 
> How can I do with pacemaker ? we have our self service on servers so how
> can I user Pacemaker for monitoring these services?
> 
> Thanks for reply.
> 
> Regards.
> H.Yavari

I'm not sure I understand your requirements.

There's no way to tell one node to leave the cluster when another node
is down, and it would be a bad idea if you could: the nodes could never
start up, because each would wait to see the other before starting; and
in your cluster, two nodes shutting down would make the cluster lose
quorum, so the other nodes would refuse to run any resources.

However, it is usually possible to use constraints to enforce any
desired behavior. So even those the node might not leave the cluster,
you could make the cluster not place any resources on that node.

Can you give more information about your resources and what nodes they
are allowed to run on? What makes App1 and App3 dependent on each other?

___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org


  ___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

[ClusterLabs] Fw: Moving Related Servers

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi,
I have 4 CentOS servers (App1,App2.App3 and App4). I created a cluster for App1 
and App2 with a IP float and it works well. In our infrastructure App1 works 
only with App3 and App2 only works with App4. I mean we have 2 server sets 
(App1 and App3) , (App2 and App4).So I want when server app1 is down and app2 
will Online node, App3 will offline too and App4 will Online and vice versa, I 
mean when App3 is down and App4 will Online, App1 will offline too.

How can I do with pacemaker ? we have our self service on servers so how can I 
user Pacemaker for monitoring these services?

Thanks for reply.
Regards.H.Yavari


   ___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

[ClusterLabs] Moving Related Servers

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi,
I have 4 CentOS servers (App1,App2.App3 and App4). I created a cluster for App1 
and App2 with a IP float and it works well. In our infrastructure App1 works 
only with App3 and App2 only works with App4. I mean we have 2 server sets 
(App1 and App3) , (App2 and App4).So I want when server app1 is down and app2 
will Online node, App3 will offline too and App4 will Online and vice versa, I 
mean when App3 is down and App4 will Online, App1 will offline too.

How can I do with pacemaker ? we have our self service on servers so how can I 
user Pacemaker for monitoring these services?

Thanks for reply.
Regards.H.Yavari
___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

Re: [ClusterLabs] Asterisk as a resource

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi,
I'm newbie so sorry for this questions.But I can't find any usuful doc. 
I added ocf resource agent of asterisk to my heartbeat lib. I used this command 
to add a resource :pcs resource create pbx ocf:heartbeat:asterisk params 
user="root" group="root" maxfiles="65536" op start interval="1" timeout="30s" 
op monitor interval="5s" timeout="30s"

but when I run "pcs status", I received "FAILED (unmanaged)"  and " pbx_start_0 
on ha-1 'unknown error' (1): call=12, status=Timed Out, exitreason='none',
    last-rc-change='Thu Oct  1 23:40:53 2015', queued=0ms, exec=20003ms"
errors.
So what is problem? 

(I configured IPaddr2 too and It's work.)

Thanks for reply.
 

 From: ‪H Yavari‬ ‪ <hyav...@rocketmail.com>
 
   


Hi,
I want to add Asterisk pbx as a rsource to pacemaker/corosync. I'm using that 
latest version (version 1.1.13-a14efad). I searched but I could find only old 
version configuration.Can you give me some hints for configs?Thanks.
Regards.


   

  ___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

Re: [ClusterLabs] a newbie --question

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi ,
Sorry but I'm a little confused.I should create a cluster with 4 node, how each 
node will be configured? 
I should note this, that end users only work with App Z. App Y only is in 
communication with App Z.So I should define one floating IP on all nodes? or on 
2 App Z nodes?
I should configure all services that related to App Z and App Y on all nodes?
For example App Z is Apache. I should add Apache to resources on all nodes? or 
only to nodes that run this service? 

Thanks for your reply.
Regards.

  From: Michael Schwartzkopff <m...@sys4.de>
Am Dienstag, 15. September 2015, 13:38:59 schrieb H Yavari‬:


> Hi,
> Thanks for reply.
> The problem is Compute resource, the appY and appZ can't run on same Server.
> It is possible ?
> Regards,

As far as I understood:

You have the applications Y and Z and the servers A, B, C and D.

The applications Y and Z cannot run on the same node.



Solution    1:
Make two clusters M (from node A and B) and Cluster N (from nodes C and D). 
Cluster M runs the application Y and Cluster N run the application Z.

Solution 2:
Make one big cluster from all four nodes and configure constraints that the 
applications will not run on the same node. Side note: Basically you only need 
three nodes in this scenario:
- application Y running on node A
- application Z running on node B
- in case of a failure of A or B the cluster starts the failed application on 
node C


Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

Michael Schwartzkopff

-- 
[*] sys4 AG

http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64, +49 (162) 165 0044
Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München

Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263
Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Marc Schiffbauer
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein

  ___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

Re: [ClusterLabs] a newbie --question

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

I should note this: AppY on Node A works only with AppZ on Node B, and AppY on 
Node C works only with AppZ on Node D.(Some hardware restrictions)

Regards,


  From: Michael Schwartzkopff <m...@sys4.de>
 
   
Am Dienstag, 15. September 2015, 13:38:59 schrieb H Yavari‬:


> Hi,
> Thanks for reply.
> The problem is Compute resource, the appY and appZ can't run on same Server.
> It is possible ?
> Regards,

As far as I understood:

You have the applications Y and Z and the servers A, B, C and D.

The applications Y and Z cannot run on the same node.



Solution    1:
Make two clusters M (from node A and B) and Cluster N (from nodes C and D). 
Cluster M runs the application Y and Cluster N run the application Z.

Solution 2:
Make one big cluster from all four nodes and configure constraints that the 
applications will not run on the same node. Side note: Basically you only need 
three nodes in this scenario:
- application Y running on node A
- application Z running on node B
- in case of a failure of A or B the cluster starts the failed application on 
node C


Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

Michael Schwartzkopff

-- 
[*] sys4 AG

http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64, +49 (162) 165 0044
Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München

Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263
Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Marc Schiffbauer
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein

  ___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

Re: [ClusterLabs] a newbie --question

[‪H Yavari‬ ‪]

Hi,
Thanks a lot. But can you give me some hints about configuration?
Regards,
  From: Andrei Borzenkov 
 To: hyav...@rocketmail.com; Cluster Labs - All topics related to open-source 
clustering welcomed  

   
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 4:38 PM,   wrote:


> Hi,
>
> Thanks for reply.
> The problem is Compute resource, the appY and appZ can't run on same Server.
>
> It is possible ?
>

Yes; set location constraint that appY cannot run on the same node as
appZ (and vice versa). Alternatively you can set location constraints
that restrict appY and appZ to specific set of servers.


  ___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org