[ClusterLabs] Antw: why is node fenced ?

[Jan Pokorný]

On 20/05/19 08:28 +0200, Ulrich Windl wrote:
>> One network interface is gone for a short period. But it's in a
>> bonding device (round-robin), so the connection shouldn't be lost.
>> Both nodes are connected directly, there is no switch in between.
> 
> I think you misunderstood: a round-robin bonding device is not
> fault-safe IMHO, but it depends a lot on your cabling details. Also
> you did not show the logs on the other nodes.

That was sort of my point.  I think that in this case, the
fault tolerance together with TCP's "best effort" makes the case
effectively fault-recoverable (except for some pathological scenarios
perhaps) -- so the whole "value proposition" for that mode can
make false impressions even for when it's not the case ... like
with corosync (since it intentionally opts for unreliable
transport for performance/scalability).

(saying that as someone who has just about a single hands-on
experiment with bonding behind...)

-- 
Jan (Poki)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20190520/ca793f55/attachment.sig>