<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
11.10.2016 17:40, Ken Gaillot:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1177ce94-1318-8c2d-8738-a42b0e12bda2@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On 10/11/2016 07:06 AM, Pavel Levshin wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hi!
In continuation of prevoius mails, now I have more complex setup. Our
hardware are capable of two STONITH methods: ILO and SCSI persistent
reservations on shared storage. First method works fine, nevertheless,
sometimes in the past we faced problems with inaccessible ILO devices or
something... So, we would like to have SCSI fencing as an additional method.
The problem: when a node 2 recovers, some resources are just stopped and
restarted on node 1. As far as I understand, primitive resources are
affected, but clone instances are not affected.
In the example below, when bvnode2 recovers, vm_smartbv1 is restarted on
bvnode1, and vm_smartbv2 is live-migrated without interruption to
bvnode2. All other resources are clones working on bvnode1 and they are
unaffected.
If I set "meta requires=fencing" for vm resources, they are not
restarted anymore. But why unfencing of bvnode2 affects resources
running on bvnode1?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
That does seem odd.
Something I notice in the config below is that only the ILO devices are
listed in the fence topology, and the only fence level is "10". Valid
indexes are 1 to 9, so this should have produced a log error about "Bad
topology".
If you want the storage fencing as a fallback in case ILO fails, you
want the devices in two levels, e.g. level 1 = ILO, level 2 = storage.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
There were levels 10 and 20 earlier, and this worked (aside from the
problem with unwanted restarts). Docs say that fencing level are
numeric and tried in ascending order, there is no visible
restriction on those numbers. No errors about bad topology. Levels
come to play when it is time to fence someone, which does not
happen.<br>
<br>
<br>
So I assume that levels have nothing to do with the problem. Now the
topology is: <br>
<br>
<span lang="EN-US">ilo.bvnode2 (stonith:fence_ilo4): Started
bvnode1<o:p></o:p></span>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">ilo.bvnode1
(stonith:fence_ilo4): Started bvnode2<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">storage.bvnode1
(stonith:fence_mpath): Started bvnode1<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">storage.bvnode2
(stonith:fence_mpath): Started bvnode2<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Node: bvnode1<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> Level 10 - ilo.bvnode1<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> Level 20 - storage.bvnode1<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Node: bvnode2<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> Level 10 - ilo.bvnode2<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"> Level 20 - storage.bvnode2<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Pavel Levshin<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>