[Pacemaker] Manging Virtual Machine's resource

Serge Dubrouski sergeyfd at gmail.com
Wed May 21 11:20:57 EDT 2008

>>>  a. VMs might be migrated between dom0s anytime, so set dom0 as a
>>> parameter to STONITH plugin is not ideal in practice. (The same
>>> problem applies to VMware ESX server also.)
> Why even set a dom0 name?
> Just have a clone that only runs on physical machines (use a node attribute)
> and have the STONITH plugin examine its own list of nodes it can fence (the
> vmware STONITH plugin does something like this).

It depend on what you are building. In case of cluster of Dom0s (like
one discussed here) you are right. In this case VMs themselves are
resources of the cluster and in most cases they don't run
Herabeat/Pcaemaker at all. But if you are building a cluster of DomUs
(no Pacemaker on Dom0s), and this case is widely used too, there is a
lot of sense to have a STONITH plugin on those DomUs and use Dom0s as
a STONITH device.

> It makes no sense for VMs to run a STONITH resource (assuming they're part
> of the cluster - I'm not 100% sure what you're proposing), since the only
> method of communication to the STONITH device (dom0) is inherently
> unreliable (ie. ssh/telnet).
> Sidenote: Yes, I have been known to advocate using ssh-based STONITH plugins
> - but only in cases where there is no alternative.
> In this case there is a viable alternative, the dom0 hosts.

Serge Dubrouski.

More information about the Pacemaker mailing list