Am 20.06.2014 14:19, schrieb Dan Kenigsberg: >> the host was not fenced, the vms where fenced. >> >> here is a link to the documentation which should explain what I mean: >> >> https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Virtualization/3.3/html/Administration_Guide/Virtual_Machine_Networks_and_Optional_Networks.html > > Are you refering to the paragraph: "When a required network becomes > non-operational, the virtual machines running on the network are fenced > and migrated to another host. This is beneficial if you have machines > running mission critical workloads."?
yes >> >> this is about a single host in a cluster - ovirt can't even fence >> single hosts in a single cluster yet, see my other bug report for this: >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1054778 >> >> I could provide logs if they are really necessary, but I doubt they are. >> This is documented behaviour, but it is poorly designed, as described >> in the BZ. > > Apparently, I am not familiar enough with Engine's fencing logic; logs > may help me understand the issue, for me they are necessary is this > case. In particular, I'd like to see with my own eyes whether the VMs > where explicitly destroyed by Engine. Migrating VMs to an operational > destination makes a lot of sense. Destroying a running VM in attempt > to recuperate of a host networking issue is extraordinary (and as such, > requires exraordinary evidence). I might be able to attach some logs later. -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Regards Sven Kieske Systemadministrator Mittwald CM Service GmbH & Co. KG Königsberger Straße 6 32339 Espelkamp T: +49-5772-293-100 F: +49-5772-293-333 https://www.mittwald.de Geschäftsführer: Robert Meyer St.Nr.: 331/5721/1033, USt-IdNr.: DE814773217, HRA 6640, AG Bad Oeynhausen Komplementärin: Robert Meyer Verwaltungs GmbH, HRB 13260, AG Bad Oeynhausen _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
