On 10/10/2016 08:35 PM, Eric Robinson wrote: > Basically, when we turn off a switch, I want to keep the cluster from failing > over before Linux bonding has had a chance to recover. > > I'm mostly interested in prventing false-positive cluster failovers that > might occur during manual network maintenance (for example, testing switch > and link outages).
As you probably know when manual maintenance is being done you might take advantage of that knowledge by e.g. unmanaging the cluster during that time. > > > >>> Thanks for the clarification. So what's the easiest way to ensure >>> that the cluster waits a desired timeout before deciding that a >>> re-convergence is > necessary? >> By raising the token (lost) timeout I would say. >> Please correct my (Chrissie) but I see the token (lost) timout somehow >> as resilience against static delays + jitter on top and the >> token_retransmits_before_loss_const >> as resilience against packet-loss. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ 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
