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

Re: [Linux-cluster] I give up



On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 03:48:31PM -0600, David Teigland wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 01:27:14PM -0800, Scott Becker wrote:
> > I have three nodes. If one fails the other two are expected to maintain 
> > quorum and continue. I would really like a second failure to keep going 
> > on it's own (last man standing). For this to work I would need to set 
> > expected votes to 1 and make sure the correct node wins the ensuing 
> > fencing race.
> > 
> > Case two. I remove one node from the cluster to maintain it. Now I have 
> > a two node cluster. Same issues as above. Luci wants to set two_node = 1 
> > in this case instead of just dealing with expected votes = 1. I haven't 
> > test this because I'm testing all this with node 2 and node 3 while the 
> > future node 1 is currently our production server.
> > 
> > The ping gateway test/IP tie-breaker was my way of reliably running down 
> > to last man standing.
> 
> > By the way, I am a C programmer. (From windows land though we use RH on 
> > all of our servers.) I've spent a month trying to get this to work. It's 
> > open source and given enough time I can make it go. I don't have any 
> > more time. It's supposed to be production quality.
> 
> I'm curious if anyone else out there has done this successfully?  I doubt
> anyone at RH has ever even tried it.  It sounds to me like you're outside
> the scope of what a person can or should do with this software.  

BTW, that's not to say that we *shouldn't* work on making this a normal
and easily-done thing.  You appear to be describing a rational, and
relatively obvious use case.

Dave


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