Replying to myself:
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017, Jean-Marc Saffroy wrote:
> I am caught by surprise with this behaviour of DLM:
> - I have 5 nodes (test VMs)
> - 3 of them have 1 vote for the corosync quorum (they are "voters")
> - 2 of them have 0 vote ("non-voters")
Hi,
I am caught by surprise with this behaviour of DLM:
- I have 5 nodes (test VMs)
- 3 of them have 1 vote for the corosync quorum (they are "voters")
- 2 of them have 0 vote ("non-voters")
So the corosync quorum is 2.
On the non-voters, I run DLM and an application that runs it. On DLM,
fenci
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017, Jan Friesse wrote:
> > Could you clarify the formula for me? I don't see how "- 2" and "650"
> > map to this configuration.
>
> Since Corosync 2.3.4 when nodelist is used, totem.token is used only as
> a basis for calculating real token timeout. You can check corosync.conf
Hi Jan,
On Tue, 3 Oct 2017, Jan Friesse wrote:
> > I hope this makes sense! :)
>
> I would still have some questions :) but that is really not related to
> the problem you have.
Questions are welcome! I am new to this stack, so there is certainly room
for learning and for improvement.
> My p
On Mon, 2 Oct 2017, Jan Friesse wrote:
> > We had one problem on a real deployment of DLM+corosync (5 voters and 20
> > non-voters, with dlm on those 20, for a specific application that uses
>
> What you mean by voters and non-voters? There is 25 nodes in total and
> each of them is running coro
On Wed, 27 Sep 2017, Jan Friesse wrote:
> I don't think scheduling is the case. If scheduler would be the case
> other message (Corosync main process was not scheduled for ...) would
> kick in. This looks more like a something is blocked in totemsrp.
Ah, interesting!
> > Also, it looks like th
