On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 00:54 -0600, Jayson Vantuyl wrote: > That said, I think the solution is actually to set up the qdisk to > have a vote *AND* not configure the system as a two-node cluster. > Basically, take off the two-node flag for CMAN, set CMAN's > expected_votes to 2, give each node 1 vote and the qdisk 1 vote. That's correct, if you're using a single heuristic to implement a tiebreaker. > That way, two running nodes give you quorum, either node + qdisk gives > you quorum, and either node - qdisk is inquorate. With a multi-point qdisk setup, you want qdisk to be required (generally) - i.e., when monitoring multiple network paths. However, for a 2-node + tiebreaker setup, yours looks right. > Can any of the cluster gods comment on this? I usually have 3 or more > nodes. I hadn't considered the implications of doing 1 vote for 3+ node clusters, but I don't think there are any; it should work, but it wouldn't be particularly useful. The man pages talk about the general setup for making N->1 failure recovery work using qdisk, but it's missing the 2-node+tiebreaker case. I'll have to add that (since it's a *very* interesting use case). -- Lon -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
