On 21.07.2021 07:28, Strahil Nikolov via Users wrote:
> Hi,
> consider using a 3rd system as a Q disk.
What was not clear in "Quorum is a different concept and doesn't remove
the need for fencing"?
> Also, you can use iscsi from that node as a SBD device, so you will have
> proper fencing .If
Hi,
consider using a 3rd system as a Q disk. Also, you can use iscsi from that node
as a SBD device, so you will have proper fencing .If you don't have a hardware
watchdog device, you can use softdog kernel module for that.
Best Regards,Strahil Nikolov
On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 1:45, Digimer
On 2021-07-20 6:04 p.m., john tillman wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> Is it possible to configure a two node cluster (pacemaker 2.0) without
> fencing and avoid split brain?
No.
> I was hoping there was a way to use a 3rd node's ip address, like from a
> network switch, as a tie breaker to provide
Greetings,
Is it possible to configure a two node cluster (pacemaker 2.0) without
fencing and avoid split brain?
I was hoping there was a way to use a 3rd node's ip address, like from a
network switch, as a tie breaker to provide quorum. A simple successful
ping would do it.
I realize that
I think Ulrich was ment the "dirty" buffers like the ones described at
https://www.suse.com/support/kb/doc/?id=17857
Based on my experience, you should lower the background dirty tunable as low as
possible (let's say 500-600MB) and increase the other tunable at least the
double.
Keep in
Thanks Ulrich !
Could you explain me what to do about the tuning of the kernel to limit the
amount of dirty buffers ?
Br,
Florent
Classification : Internal
-Message d'origine-
De : Users De la part de Ulrich Windl
Envoyé : mardi 20 juillet 2021 12:02
À : users@clusterlabs.org
Objet
On Tue, 2021-07-20 at 09:51 +, PASERO Florent wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Once or twice a week, we have a 'Timed out' on our VIP.
>
> The last :
> Cluster Summary:
> * Stack: corosync
> * Current DC: server07 (version 2.0.5-9.el8_4.1-ba59be7122) -
> partition with quorum
> * Last updated: Tue
>>> "Ulrich Windl" schrieb am 20.07.2021
um
12:01 in Nachricht <60f69efb02a100042...@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de>:
> Hi!
>
> In the commands traced, no command (that is the monitor) too more than 3
s/too/took/ # Sorry!
> seconds, so that either is *not* the timeout, or pacemaker got
Hi!
In the commands traced, no command (that is the monitor) too more than 3
seconds, so that either is *not* the timeout, or pacemaker got significantly
delayed.
One reason I could imagine is a "read stall". For example you could trigger
such if you rapidly fill your block cache with dirty
