[ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: Antw: [EXT] Re: Stonith

[Ulrich Windl]

>>> Ken Gaillot <kgaillot at redhat.com> schrieb am 20.12.2022 um 16:21 in
Nachricht
<3a5960c2331f97496119720f6b5a760b3fe3bbcf.camel at redhat.com>:
> On Tue, 2022‑12‑20 at 11:33 +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 10:07 AM Ulrich Windl
>> <Ulrich.Windl at rz.uni‑regensburg.de> wrote:
>> > > But keep in mind that if the whole site is down (or unaccessible)
>> > > you
>> > > will not have access to IPMI/PDU/whatever on this site so your
>> > > stonith
>> > > agents will fail ...
>> > 
>> > But, considering the design, such site won't have a quorum and
>> > should commit suicide, right?
>> > 
>> 
>> Not by default.
> 
> And even if it does, the rest of the cluster can't assume that it did,
> so resources can't be recovered. It could work with sbd, but the poster
> said that the physical hosts aren't accessible.

Why? Assuming fencing is configured, the nodes part of the quorum should wait
for fencing delay, assuming fencing (or suicide) was done.
Then they can manage resources. OK, a non-working fencing or suicide mechanism
is a different story...

Regards,
Ulrich


> ‑‑ 
> Ken Gaillot <kgaillot at redhat.com>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Manage your subscription:
> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users 
> 
> ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/