Would it be correct to say that VMs running on NFS/local storage will not
be affected if there is no SPM host.In other words,these VMs can still be
started on a non SPM host (host 2) after host1 got fenced(SPM host before
it got fenced).
On Wednesday, June 12, 2013, Marc Seward wrote:
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Marc Seward <linuxuse...@gmail.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'linuxuse...@gmail.com');>>
> Date: Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:06 PM
> Subject: Re: [Users] HA and SPM host
> To: Jiri Belka <jbe...@redhat.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'jbe...@redhat.com');>>
>
>
> Thank you very much for your response.
>
> I have noticed delays in the selection of the SPM host and attempts to run
> VMs even before SPM host is selected.AFAIU,that is incorrect behavior.
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Jiri Belka
> <jbe...@redhat.com<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'jbe...@redhat.com');>
> > wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 12:16:28 -0400
>> Marc Seward <linuxuse...@gmail.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
>> 'linuxuse...@gmail.com');>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > In a 2 hypervisor setup,if host1 is fenced(host1 is also the SPM host)
>> and
>> > it has HA VMs running on it,would these VMs be started on host2 only
>> after
>> > host2 is elected as the SPM host?
>>
>> It would first try to migrate VMs and if this won't work if would fence
>> SPM host and start HA VMs on other (now new SPM) host.
>>
>> j.
>>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
