[ClusterLabs] Resources still retains in Primary Node even though its interface went down
pillai bs
pillaibsmail at gmail.com
Fri May 26 01:48:34 EDT 2017
Thanks Ken Gaillot,
I will try configuring the resources to monitor and update. Thank you.
Regards,
Madhan.B
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 10:48 PM, Ken Gaillot <kgaillot at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 05/18/2017 07:54 AM, pillai bs wrote:
> > Hi Ken Gaillot,
> >
> > Sorry for the late reply.
> > No i didnt configured any thing to monitor the resources.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Madhan.B
>
> Pacemaker has the built-in capability to monitor resources, but it
> doesn't do that unless you tell it to. Without a monitor, Pacemaker will
> never know when a resource has failed.
>
> How you configure a monitor depends on whether you use crm shell, pcs,
> or whatever, but basically you just specify that you want to create an
> operation for the resource of type "monitor" with some interval (such as
> 30 seconds).
>
>
> > On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 12:54 AM, Ken Gaillot <kgaillot at redhat.com
> > <mailto:kgaillot at redhat.com>> wrote:
> >
> > On 05/12/2017 09:43 AM, pillai bs wrote:
> > > Thank you for the Prompt reply.
> > > I have one more question.sorry it might be silly. but am wondering
> after
> > > noticed this.
> > > I made that interface down <NO carrier> but how the ip
> address(Public)
> > > & VIP (IP resource) are still in primary node.
> > > If i made interface down, public IP address also have to go down
> right?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > pillai.bs <http://pillai.bs> <http://pillai.bs>
> >
> > Did you configure a monitor operation on the IP address resources?
> >
> > > On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Ken Gaillot <kgaillot at redhat.com
> <mailto:kgaillot at redhat.com>
> > > <mailto:kgaillot at redhat.com <mailto:kgaillot at redhat.com>>> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 05/03/2017 02:43 AM, pillai bs wrote:
> > > > Hi Experts!!!
> > > >
> > > > Am having two node setup for HA
> > (Primary/Secondary) with
> > > > separate resources for Home/data/logs/Virtual IP.. As known
> the
> > > Expected
> > > > behavior should be , if Primary node went down, secondary
> > has to take
> > > > in-charge (meaning initially the VIP will point the primary
> > node, so
> > > > user can access home/data/logs from primary node.Once
> > primary node
> > > went
> > > > down, the VIP/floatingIP will point the secondary node so
> > that the
> > > user
> > > > can experienced uninterrupted service).
> > > > I'm using dual ring support to avoid split
> > brain. I have
> > > > two interfaces (Public & Private).Intention for having
> private
> > > interface
> > > > is for Data Sync alone.
> > > >
> > > > I have tested my setup in two different ways:
> > > > 1. Made primary Interface down (ifdown eth0), as expected
> > VIP and
> > > other
> > > > resources moved from primary to secondary node.(VIP will not
> be
> > > > reachable from primary node)
> > > > 2. Made Primary Interface down (Physically unplugged the
> > Ethernet
> > > > Cable). The primary node still retain the resources,
> > > VIP/FloatingIP was
> > > > reachable from primary node.
> > > >
> > > > Is my testing correct?? how come the VIP will be reachable
> > even though
> > > > eth0 was down. Please advice!!!
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Madhan.B
> > >
> > > Sorry, didn't see this message before replying to the other
> one :)
> > >
> > > The IP resource is successful if the IP is up *on that host*.
> > It doesn't
> > > check that the IP is reachable from any other site. Similarly,
> > > filesystem resources just make sure that the filesystem can be
> > mounted
> > > on the host. So, unplugging the Ethernet won't necessarily
> > make those
> > > resources fail.
> > >
> > > Take a look at the ocf:pacemaker:ping resource for a way to
> > ensure that
> > > the primary host has connectivity to the outside world. Also,
> > be sure
> > > you have fencing configured, so that the surviving node can
> > kill a node
> > > that is completely cut off or unresponsive.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20170526/705c30e1/attachment-0003.html>
More information about the Users
mailing list