Darren Thompson <[email protected]> writes: > Just a quick question: > > If "scripts: no-quorum-policy=ignore" is becoming depreciated, how are we > to manage two node (e.g. test) clusters that require this work around since > quorum state on a single node is an odd state. >
Hi Darren, There are better mechanisms in corosync and Pacemaker for handling two node clusters now while still maintaining quorum. In corosync 2, we have the two_node: 1 setting for votequorum, which ensures that a two node cluster doesn't suffer split brain (fencing is required for this to work properly). There is an explanation for how this works here: http://people.redhat.com/ccaulfie/docs/Votequorum_Intro.pdf Somewhat related, there used to be the start-delay meta parameter which could be set for example for sbd stonith resources, to make a double-fencing scenario less likely. This has now been replaced by the pcmk_delay_max parameter. For an example of how to use this, see this pull request for sbd: https://github.com/ClusterLabs/sbd/pull/15/commits/ca2fba836eab169f0c8cacf7f3757c0485bcfef8 Cheers, Kristoffer -- // Kristoffer Grönlund // [email protected] _______________________________________________ Users mailing list: [email protected] http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
