Hello,
i tried with a 4-node setup but the effect is the same, it takes down
the cluster when one of the node is offline. I thought even in a 3-node
setup when 2 nodes are online and only one is gone the majority of 2
nodes up vs. 1 node down should not result in a lost quorum?
I have created the g
On 11/30/2015 03:26 PM, Soumya Koduri wrote:
Hi,
But are you telling me that in a 3-node cluster,
quorum is lost when one of the nodes ip is down?
yes. Its the limitation with Pacemaker/Corosync. If the nodes
participating in cluster cannot communicate with majority of them
(quorum is lost),
Hi,
But are you telling me that in a 3-node cluster,
quorum is lost when one of the nodes ip is down?
yes. Its the limitation with Pacemaker/Corosync. If the nodes
participating in cluster cannot communicate with majority of them
(quorum is lost), then the cluster is shut down.
However i
Dear Soumya,
First of all thank you for your answer.
On Fre, 2015-11-27 at 14:27 +0530, Soumya Koduri wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 11/27/2015 01:58 PM, ml wrote:
> > Dear All,
> >
> > I am trying to get a nfs-ganesha ha cluster running, with 3, CentOS
> > Linux release 7.1.1503 nodes. I use the package
Hi,
On 11/27/2015 01:58 PM, ml wrote:
Dear All,
I am trying to get a nfs-ganesha ha cluster running, with 3, CentOS
Linux release 7.1.1503 nodes. I use the package glusterfs-ganesha-3.7.6
-1.el7.x86_64 to get the HA scripts. So far it works fine when i stop
the nfs-ganesha service on one of the
Dear All,
I am trying to get a nfs-ganesha ha cluster running, with 3, CentOS
Linux release 7.1.1503 nodes. I use the package glusterfs-ganesha-3.7.6
-1.el7.x86_64 to get the HA scripts. So far it works fine when i stop
the nfs-ganesha service on one of the node it moves the virtual ip to
one of t
