[Pacemaker] dopd on openais

Lars Ellenberg lars.ellenberg at linbit.com
Tue Jun 9 07:24:57 EDT 2009

On Sat, Jun 06, 2009 at 04:33:48PM +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2009-06-06T10:59:44, Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenberg at linbit.com> wrote:
> > > On join of a drbd_<UUID> group, you could see who else is there and
> > > connect to them, and also figure out if people try to start on more than
> > > 2 nodes etc.
> > now since when do you want a dopd bypassing the crm?
> > to ensure that would be the crm's job, no?
> I don't think of this as a bypass. OCFS2/DLM use similar mechanisms to
> ensure their internal integrity as well.
> With drbd supporting active/active or active/passive, for example, the
> CRM/RA can't reliably tell whether the number of activated nodes is
> corrected (and this will get worse if >2 nodes ever are supported),
> without resorting to parse drbd's configuration file, which is icky (and
> relies on the configfile being identical on all nodes).

this was about "dopd replacement".
how do we reduce the risk of going online with out-of-date, stale, data.

so appart from being "off topic",
it is not the RAs job to force a certain configuration.
you configure master-max=2, and forget to allow two primaries in
drbd.conf: promoting the second one will fail.
so what.

the other way around: allow two primaries in drbd.conf,
but master-max=1 in the cib: no harm done.

and that has nothing to do with "outdate peer".

> And also this would reduce the amount of configuration necessary - ie,
> if the IP addresses were inherited from the OpenAIS configuration. (By
> default; of course this could be overridden.)
> Actually, how about storing the configuration of each drbd instance in
> the instance's meta-data?
> With internal meta-data, for example, one could then simply say: "start
> device XXX".

I do not follow.
what problem is it you are trying to solve?

> If the meta-data then was distributed using OpenAIS (say, in a
> checkpoint, quite easy to do I'm told ;-), on the second node, the
> initial setup would be reduced to "drbdadm clone <drbd-id>
> <local-device>"

to distribute drbd.conf, use csync2.  to get rid of drbd.conf, rewrite a
drbd RA to only use drbdsetup, and pass all configuration in as instance

I see absolutely no need to write yet an other distributed (based on
openAIS or whatever) configuration and meta data and whatnot daemon,
if we already have the cib.

> There could be a start-or-clone command too (maybe even the default?)
> which would do the right thing (either resync if a copy already existed
> or do a full clone), easing recovery of failed nodes.

drbd does that now.
but maybe I again don't see which problem you are trying to solve?

> And if the configuration is distributed using OpenAIS, doing a "drbdadm
> configure change syncer-speed 10M" would immediately affect all nodes
> w/o needing to manually modify drbd.conf everywhere.

see above: http://oss.linbit.com/csync2
or use the cib.

> > what we actually are doing right now is placing location constraints on
> > the master role into the cib from the "fence-peer" handler, and removing
> > them again from the "after-sync-target" handler.  sort of works.
> Here I think we need a more extensive discussion. Why doesn't your
> handler modify the master score instead, but add additional
> constraints?

generic question about master score and globally-unique=false.
I don't think it can even work.

but if they can work, how, and why,
are master scores supposed to work?

if _by definition_ the instances are not distinguishable,
why would placing a master preference on drbd-xy:1 prevent
drbd-xy:1 from being allocated on the "wrong" node
accessing the "wrong" data?

if we are "globally-unique=false" (and I really think drbd would fall
into that category), then there is no difference whether I place
the better score on drbd-xy:0 or drbd-xy:1.
appart from _accidentally_ colocating drbd-xy:0 with the same (group of)
hosts, "most of the time".

what am I missing?

: Lars Ellenberg
: LINBIT | Your Way to High Availability
: DRBD/HA support and consulting http://www.linbit.com

DRBD® and LINBIT® are registered trademarks of LINBIT, Austria.

More information about the Pacemaker mailing list