[Pacemaker] no-quorum-policy = demote?

Christian Ciach dereineda at gmail.com
Mon May 26 08:47:48 EDT 2014

I am sorry to get back to this topic, but I'm genuinely curious:

Why is "demote" an option for the ticket "loss-policy" for
multi-site-clusters but not for the normal "no-quorum-policy" of local
clusters? This seems like a missing feature to me.

Best regards

2014-04-07 9:54 GMT+02:00 Christian Ciach <dereineda at gmail.com>:

> Hello,
> I am using Corosync 2.0 with Pacemaker 1.1 on Ubuntu Server 14.04 (daily
> builds until final release).
> My problem is as follows: I have a 2-node (plus a quorum-node) cluster to
> manage a multistate-resource. One node should be the master and the other
> one the slave. It is absolutely not allowed to have two masters at the same
> time. To prevent a split-brain situation, I am also using a third node as a
> quorum-only node (set to standby). There is no redundant connection because
> the nodes are connected over the internet.
> If one of the two nodes managing the resource becomes disconnected, it
> loses quorum. In this case, I want this resource to become a slave, but the
> resource should never be stopped completely! This leaves me with a problem:
> "no-quorum-policy=stop" will stop the resource, while
> "no-quorum-policy=ignore" will keep this resource in a master-state. I
> already tried to demote the resource manually inside the monitor-action of
> the OCF-agent, but pacemaker will promote the resource immediately again.
> I am aware that I am trying the manage a multi-site-cluster and there is
> something like the booth-daemon, which sounds like the solution to my
> problem. But unfortunately I need the location-constraints of pacemaker
> based on the score of the OCF-agent. As far as I know location-constraints
> are not possible when using booth, because the 2-node-cluster is
> essentially split into two 1-node-clusters. Is this correct?
> To conclude: Is it possible to demote a resource on quorum loss instead of
> stopping it? Is booth an option if I need to manage the location of the
> master based on the score returned by the OCF-agent?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/pacemaker/attachments/20140526/7c9a5e5a/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the Pacemaker mailing list