<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000'>Hi Steve,<div><br></div><div>Thanks for the clarification. Am I correct in understanding that in a complete network, corosync will automatically re-add nodes that drop out and reappear for any reason (e.g. maintenance, network connectivity loss, STONITH, etc)?</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div><br></div><div>Andrew<br><br><hr id="zwchr"><div style="color:#000;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;text-decoration:none;font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;"><b>From: </b>"Steven Dake" <sdake@redhat.com><br><b>To: </b>"The Pacemaker cluster resource manager" <pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org><br><b>Cc: </b>discuss@corosync.org<br><b>Sent: </b>Friday, June 29, 2012 9:40:43 AM<br><b>Subject: </b>Re: [Pacemaker] Different Corosync Rings for Different Nodes in Same Cluster?<br><br>On 06/29/2012 01:42 AM, Dan Frincu wrote:<br>> Hi,<br>> <br>> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 6:13 PM, Andrew Martin <amartin@xes-inc.com> wrote:<br>>> Hi Dan,<br>>><br>>> Thanks for the help. If I configure the network as I described - ring 0 as<br>>> the network all 3 nodes are on, ring 1 as the network only 2 of the nodes<br>>> are on, and using "passive" - and the ring 0 network goes down, corosync<br>>> will start using ring 1. Does this mean that the quorum node will appear to<br>>> be offline to the cluster? Will the cluster attempt to STONITH it? Once the<br>>> ring 0 network is available again, will corosync transition back to using it<br>>> as the communication ring, or will it continue to use ring 1 until it fails?<br>>><br>>> The ideal behavior would be when ring 0 fails it then communicates over ring<br>>> 1, but keeps periodically checking to see if ring 0 is working again. Once<br>>> it is, it returns to using ring 0. Is this possible?<br>> <br>> Added corosync ML in CC as I think this is better asked here as well.<br>> <br>> Regards,<br>> Dan<br>> <br>>><br>>> Thanks,<br>>><br>>> Andrew<br>>><br>>> ________________________________<br>>> From: "Dan Frincu" <df.cluster@gmail.com><br>>> To: "The Pacemaker cluster resource manager" <pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org><br>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 3:42:42 AM<br>>> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Different Corosync Rings for Different Nodes<br>>> in Same Cluster?<br>>><br>>><br>>> Hi,<br>>><br>>> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 9:53 PM, Andrew Martin <amartin@xes-inc.com> wrote:<br>>>> Hello,<br>>>><br>>>> I am setting up a 3 node cluster with Corosync + Pacemaker on Ubuntu 12.04<br>>>> server. Two of the nodes are "real" nodes, while the 3rd is in standby<br>>>> mode<br>>>> as a quorum node. The two "real" nodes each have two NICs, one that is<br>>>> connected to a shared LAN and the other that is directly connected between<br>>>> the two nodes (for DRBD replication). The quorum node is only connected to<br>>>> the shared LAN. I would like to have multiple Corosync rings for<br>>>> redundancy,<br>>>> however I do not know if this would cause problems for the quorum node. Is<br>>>> it possible for me to configure the shared LAN as ring 0 (which all 3<br>>>> nodes<br>>>> are connected to) and set the rrp_mode to passive so that it will use ring<br>>>> 0<br>>>> unless there is a failure, but to also configure the direct link between<br>>>> the<br>>>> two "real" nodes as ring 1?<br>>><br><br>In general I think you cannot do what you describe. Let me repeat it so<br>its clear:<br><br>A B C - NET #1<br>A B - Net #2<br><br>Where A, B are your cluster nodes, and C is your quorum node.<br><br>You want Net #1 and Net #2 to serve as redundant rings. Since C is<br>missing, Net #2 will automatically be detected as faulty.<br><br>The part about corosync automatically repairing nodes is correct, that<br>would work (If you had a complete network).<br><br>Regards<br>-steve<br><br>>> Short answer, yes.<br>>><br>>> Longer answer. I have a setup with two nodes with two interfaces, one<br>>> is connected via a switch to the other node and one is a back-to-back<br>>> link for DRBD replication. In Corosync I have two rings, one that goes<br>>> via the switch and one via the back-to-back link (rrp_mode: active).<br>>> With rrp_mode: passive it should work the way you mentioned.<br>>><br>>> HTH,<br>>> Dan<br>>><br>>>><br>>>> Thanks,<br>>>><br>>>> Andrew<br>>>><br>>>> _______________________________________________<br>>>> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org<br>>>> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker<br>>>><br>>>> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org<br>>>> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf<br>>>> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org<br>>>><br>>><br>>><br>>><br>>> --<br>>> Dan Frincu<br>>> CCNA, RHCE<br>>><br>>> _______________________________________________<br>>> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org<br>>> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker<br>>><br>>> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org<br>>> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf<br>>> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org<br>>><br>>><br>>> _______________________________________________<br>>> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org<br>>> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker<br>>><br>>> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org<br>>> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf<br>>> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org<br>>><br>> <br>> <br>> <br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org<br>http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker<br><br>Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org<br>Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf<br>Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org<br></div><br></div></div></body></html>