[ClusterLabs] Two node cluster without fencing and no split brain?

[Andrei Borzenkov]

On 21.07.2021 07:28, Strahil Nikolov via Users wrote:
> Hi,
> consider using a 3rd system as a Q disk.

What was not clear in "Quorum is a different concept and doesn't remove
the need for fencing"?

> Also, you can use iscsi from that node as a SBD device, so you will have proper fencing .If you don't have a hardware watchdog device, you can use softdog kernel module for that.
> Best Regards,Strahil Nikolov
>  
>  
>   On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 1:45, Digimer<lists at alteeve.ca> wrote:   On 2021-07-20 6:04 p.m., john tillman wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> Is it possible to configure a two node cluster (pacemaker 2.0) without
>> fencing and avoid split brain?
> 
> No.
> 
>> I was hoping there was a way to use a 3rd node's ip address, like from a
>> network switch, as a tie breaker to provide quorum.  A simple successful
>> ping would do it.
> 
> Quorum is a different concept and doesn't remove the need for fencing.
> 
>> I realize that this 'ping' approach is not the bullet proof solution that
>> fencing would provide.  However, it may be an improvement over two nodes
>> alone.
> 
> It would be, at best, a false sense of security.
> 
>> Is there a configuration like that already?  Any other ideas?
>>
>> Pointers to useful documents/discussions on avoiding split brain with two
>> node clusters would be welcome.
> 
> https://www.alteeve.com/w/The_2-Node_Myth
> 
> (note: currently throwing a cert error related to the let's encrypt
> issue, should be cleared up soon).
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Manage your subscription:
> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> 
> ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
>