hi,
i tried as i found in tutorial to kill -9 corosync on active node (n1). but
the other node (n2)
failed to demote drbd. after corosync start on n1, n2:drbd was left
unmanaged.
but /proc/drbd on both nodes looked good: connected and uptodate.
how in such situation a resource can get managed
little error: n2 failed to promote drbd !
when i try to `drbdadm connect r0` on both nodes, it looks to me that the
connection state can change from Standalone to WFConnection
iff the other node is currently Standalone. WFConnection on both nodes does
not meet at the same time.
thanks
andreas
My guess is you don't have (working) fencing/stonith? Can you pastebin
your 'pcs config show' please? Also, 'drbdadm dump' please.
digimer
On 06/17/2013 09:32 AM, andreas graeper wrote:
hi,
i tried as i found in tutorial to kill -9 corosync on active node (n1).
but the other node (n2)
failed
On 06/17/2013 09:53 AM, andreas graeper wrote:
hi,
i will not have a stonith-device. i can test for a day a 'expert power
control 8212', but in the end i will stay without.
This is an extremely flawed approach. Clustering with shared storage and
without stonith will certainly cause data loss
If you look in your logs when you try to connect the two nodes, you will
likely see a message like split-brain detected, dropping connection.
This is the result of not using fencing as you created a condition where
both nodes went StandAlone and Primary.
To prevent this, you need to setup
Hi,
I have 2 node setup active/passive with drbd/file system/ip-failover
Ubuntu-12.04-2
Linux 3.5.0-34-generic
After Ip-failover is established on active node, mount client on active node
uses still real iP-addresse instead of alias ip .
I use standard simple configuration:
---
primitive
hi,
rsc_location rsc=ms_drbd id=drbd-fence-by-handler-r0-ms_drbd
rule role=Master score=-INFINITY
id=drbd-fence-by-handler-r0-rule-ms_drbd
expression attribute=#uname operation=ne value=n1
id=drbd-fence-by-handler-r0-expr-ms_drbd/
/rule
/rsc_location
whats this ?
thanks
andreas
Am 17.06.2013 15:59, schrieb Digimer:
On 06/17/2013 09:53 AM, andreas graeper wrote:
hi,
i will not have a stonith-device. i can test for a day a 'expert power
control 8212', but in the end i will stay without.
This is an extremely flawed approach. Clustering with shared storage and
without
tl;dr summary: On EC2, we can't reuse IP addresses, and we need a reliable,
scriptable procedure for replacing a dead (guaranteed no longer running) server
with another one without needing to take the remaining cluster members down.
I'm trying to build a Pacemaker solution using Percona
On 18/06/2013, at 3:09 AM, Colin Blair cbl...@technicacorp.com wrote:
All,
Newbie here. I am trying to create a two-node cluster with the following:
Ubuntu Server 11.10
Pacemaker 1.1.5
Corosync Cluster Engine 1.3.0
CMAN
I am unable to start Pacemaker. CMAN seems to run with
Hi, Andrew
I used libqb which installed from source.
A version is tag:v0.14.4.
I read the code of Pacemaker.
default_ping_set(1) is connected with CRM_meta_ and becomes
CRM_meta_default_ping_set(1).
It had failed, when it was passed to xmlCtxtReadDoc().
Jun 5 14:43:13 vm1 crmd[22669]:
On 18/06/2013, at 11:42 AM, yusuke iida yusk.i...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, Andrew
I used libqb which installed from source.
A version is tag:v0.14.4.
I read the code of Pacemaker.
default_ping_set(1) is connected with CRM_meta_ and becomes
CRM_meta_default_ping_set(1).
It had failed, when
On 18/06/2013, at 7:19 AM, Jon Eisenstein j...@animoto.com wrote:
tl;dr summary: On EC2, we can't reuse IP addresses, and we need a reliable,
scriptable procedure for replacing a dead (guaranteed no longer running)
server with another one without needing to take the remaining cluster
On 14/06/2013, at 3:52 PM, Xiaomin Zhang zhangxiao...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, Andrew:
If I cut down the network connection of the running node by:
service network stop,
crm status will show me the node is put into OFFLINE status. The affected
resource can also be failed over to another
On Jun 17, 2013, at 11:31 PM, Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net wrote:
On 18/06/2013, at 7:19 AM, Jon Eisenstein j...@animoto.com wrote:
tl;dr summary: On EC2, we can't reuse IP addresses, and we need a reliable,
scriptable procedure for replacing a dead (guaranteed no longer running)
On 18/06/2013, at 1:46 PM, Jon Eisenstein j...@animoto.com wrote:
On Jun 17, 2013, at 11:31 PM, Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net wrote:
On 18/06/2013, at 7:19 AM, Jon Eisenstein j...@animoto.com wrote:
tl;dr summary: On EC2, we can't reuse IP addresses, and we need a reliable,
On Jun 18, 2013, at 12:12 AM, Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net wrote:
On 18/06/2013, at 1:46 PM, Jon Eisenstein j...@animoto.com wrote:
On Jun 17, 2013, at 11:31 PM, Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net wrote:
On 18/06/2013, at 7:19 AM, Jon Eisenstein j...@animoto.com wrote:
tl;dr
On 18/06/2013, at 2:23 PM, Jon Eisenstein j...@animoto.com wrote:
On Jun 18, 2013, at 12:12 AM, Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net wrote:
On 18/06/2013, at 1:46 PM, Jon Eisenstein j...@animoto.com wrote:
On Jun 17, 2013, at 11:31 PM, Andrew Beekhof and...@beekhof.net wrote:
On
18 matches
Mail list logo
