Re: [Pacemaker] [Question] About quorum-policy=freeze and promote.

2014-05-09 Thread renayama19661014
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. ---

Re: [Pacemaker] [Question] About quorum-policy=freeze and promote.

2014-05-08 Thread emmanuel segura
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

Re: [Pacemaker] [Question] About quorum-policy=freeze and promote.

2014-05-08 Thread renayama19661014
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

Re: [Pacemaker] [Question] About quorum-policy=freeze and promote.

2014-05-08 Thread Andrew Beekhof
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

Re: [Pacemaker] [Question] About quorum-policy=freeze and promote.

2014-05-08 Thread Andrew Beekhof
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