[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Linux-cluster] 2-node fencing question

However, it could very well be that IPMI hardware modules are slow
enough at processing requests that this could pose a problem.  What
hardware has this happened on?  Was ACPI disabled on boot in the host OS
(it should be; see below)?


The time window for (c) increases significantly (5+ seconds) if the
cluster nodes are enabling ACPI power events on boot.  This is one of
the reasons why booting with acpi=off is required when using IPMI, iLO,
or other integrated power management solutions.

If booting with acpi=off, does the problem persist?

Lon - is the requirement for disabling acpi when using integrated fence devices documented anywhere?

I have searched far and wide on the nature of acpi=off (if it is good or bad, recommended by Red Hat or anyone out there). Yours is the strongest against acpi enabled I have found, but not for reasons I would have expected.

My impression of acpi=off is it borders on a magical cure-all for boot/installation problems (in part due to bad acpi by server/firmware vendors), but that it also acts as some kind of safe mode (e.g. ht is disabled, does things to IRQ routing, etc) which may have an adverse effect on system performance.

Are you aware of any negative effects, performance or otherwise, which acpi=off will cause. E.g. if the only adverse effect of acpi=off is hyperthreading being disabled, users that want it back, can so using acpi=ht


note: IMHO, a Knowledge Base article on the use of acpi=off (and its variants), for general RHEL installations, and pertaining to RHCS/GFS implementations would be very welcome.
fn:Riaan van Niekerk
n:van Niekerk;Riaan
org:Obsidian Systems;Obsidian Red Hat Consulting
email;internet:riaan obsidian co za
title:Systems Architect
tel;work:+27 11 792 6500
tel;fax:+27 11 792 6522
tel;cell:+27 82 921 8768

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]