[Pacemaker] Problems with SBD fencing

Lars Marowsky-Bree lmb at suse.com
Wed Aug 21 15:02:25 EDT 2013

On 2013-08-21T18:15:39, Jan Christian Kaldestad <janck76 at gmail.com> wrote:

> In my case I should mention that stonithing works occasionally when the SBD
> resource is defined on one node only, but not too often. Unfortunately I
> can't seem to find a pattern when it's working or failing. What I'm curious
> about is the following lines in the log file:

That looks as if you're hitting a pacemaker bug. Please file a bug
report with NTS; I've not seen that in my testing.

> Of course there is no route to the other host, as the network interface is
> down on the other node. The SBD stonith operation shouldn't be dependent on
> the network connection at all?

Right. This is pacemaker/stonith-ng not knowing where to send the fence
request, it has nothing to do with sbd.

> I have also been testing another case where I define the SBD resource on
> both nodes (which is not recommended as I understand). In this case
> stonithing works just fine - always. Thus SBD messaging must be working as
> it should. I also tested to fence the other node with the sbd command, and
> it always works. So I'm still confused why SBD stonithing does not work
> when the resource is defined on one node only.

Pacemaker bug.


Architect Storage/HA
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde

More information about the Pacemaker mailing list