[ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: Antw: [EXT] Two node cluster and extended distance/site failure

[Strahil Nikolov]

Instead of NFS,  iSCSI is  also an option.

Best Regards,
Strahil  Nikolov

На 24 юни 2020 г. 13:42:26 GMT+03:00, Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar at gmail.com> написа:
>24.06.2020 12:20, Ulrich Windl пишет:
>>>
>>> How Service Guard handles loss of shared storage?
>> 
>> When a node is up it would log the event; if a node is down it
>wouldn't care;
>> if a node detects a communication problem with the other node, it
>would fence
>> itself.
>> 
>
>So in case of split brain without witness both nodes fence itself and
>become unavailable. Which is exactly what I'd like to avoid if
>possible.
>
>> But hoestly: What sense does it make to run a node if the shared
>storage is
>> unavailable?
>> 
>
>Cluster nodes may use NFS which is not suitable for SBD (although I
>wonder if shared file on NFS may work) and shared SAN storage used for
>witness only. In this case it makes all sort of sense to continue when
>witness is not available.
>_______________________________________________
>Manage your subscription:
>https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/