[ClusterLabs] required nodes for quorum policy

[Radoslaw Garbacz]

Thank you Christine and Andrei,

I took a look at the corosync quorum policy configuration options, and
actually I would need a more conservative approach, i.e. to consider quorum
only if all the nodes are present - any node loss is a quorum loss event
for me. At present I check it in an agent, but would be helpful if
pacemaker took care of this for me.

I know that it is not the requirement pacemaker was designed for (i.e. it
does not use the full power of this cluster environment), but for now the
application we use cannot handle any node loss.


On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 2:13 AM, Christine Caulfield <ccaulfie at redhat.com>
wrote:

> On 09/11/15 22:20, Radoslaw Garbacz wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have a question regarding the policy to check for cluster quorum for
> > corosync+pacemaker.
> >
> > As far as I know at present it is always (excpected_votes)/2 + 1. Seems
> > like "qdiskd" has an option to change it, but it is not clear to me if
> > corosync 2.x supports different quorum device.
>
> corosync 2 does not currently support any other quorum devices. But
> watch this space ....
>
> > What are my options if I wanted to configure cluster with a different
> > quorum policy (compilation options are acceptable)?
> >
>
> Have a read of the votequorum(5) man page, there are options for
> auto_tie_breaker, and maybe others, that might be useful to you.
>
>
> Chrissie
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list: Users at clusterlabs.org
> http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
>



-- 
Best Regards,

Radoslaw Garbacz
XtremeData Incorporation
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20151119/c76c3db7/attachment-0002.html>