[ClusterLabs] Antw: [EXT] Re: Issue with Pacemaker config related to VIP and an LSB resource

[Ulrich Windl]

>>> Michael Romero <mromero at convoso.com> schrieb am 16.06.2021 um 08:02 in
Nachricht
<CAP2uDNvUF2qNgU8y_ywCtKFio3bTGuVtwB7WVBeFDzGFhsT2Yg at mail.gmail.com>:
> “But in general I guess the idea of rechecking resource after failure
> timeout once (similar to initial probe) sounds interesting. It could be

I think the standad behaviour is "recover", i.e.: try to restart the resource
on the same node anyway.


> more robust in that resource agent could check whether resource start is
> possible now at all and prevent unsuccessful attempt to migrate resource
> back to original node.”

A monitor running into timeout does not mean a resource failure, but a RA
failure.
So it's most likely the next monitor will timeouzt anyway, and you just loose
time.

> 
> Yes! This is exactly the behavior I would like to produce. Maybe if this is
> not possible with LSB, is it possible with an OCF resource ? Also I’ve
> considered having it simply not retry but I would prefer this other
> configuration if it is at all possible.

If you want reliability use OCF RAs; the rest wasn't designed for HA
clusters.

Regards,
Ulrich

> 
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 10:54 PM Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> On 16.06.2021 01:49, Michael Romero wrote:
>> >
>> > At which point an administrator or an automated script could intervene
>>
>> If you are going to always use manual intervention outside of pacemaker,
>> just leave failure timeout on default 0 so cluster will never clear
>> failure count automatically on a node.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Manage your subscription:
>> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users 
>>
>> ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ 
>>
> -- 
> Michael Romero
> 
> Lead Infrastructure Engineer
> 
> Engineering | Convoso
> 562-338-9868
> mromero at convoso.com 
> www.convoso.com 
> [image: linkedin] <https://linkedin.com/in/romerom>