On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:27 AM, Rajagopal Swaminathan <raju.rajsand@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ah, ok - in-band fencing it is, thanks. With regards to my previous post, I assumed that the name applied to the fencing method of a node had some sort of impact, but from what i can see, it seems to just be for reference.
I used to maintain consistency in the config file (which i editted manually):
<clusternode ...><fence><method name="fabric">....</></>
the method name was originally fabric as i was going to use san fabric switching, but this did not work - ILO fencing works well for us however, so "inband" would be a more relevant name.
we are making changes that now result in configuration being updated via ccs_tool, which doesn't seem to provide an parameter to configure the method name, and defaults to "single" - so this is inconsistent with naming, but with no real functional affects on the config.
thanks again.
Greetings,
I am not an expert in cluster.
Following is my understanding of fencing:
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Brett Cave <brettcave@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I am using ilo fencing to reset servers, so this is more power fencing than
> fabric fencing?
There are three type of fencing (excluding manual):
1. Power fencing -- using IP enabled power strips
2. In-band fencing -- using RSA, ILO, IPMI and the such -- sorta power fencing
3. Storage fencing -- using the SAN fabric Switch
Ah, ok - in-band fencing it is, thanks. With regards to my previous post, I assumed that the name applied to the fencing method of a node had some sort of impact, but from what i can see, it seems to just be for reference.
I used to maintain consistency in the config file (which i editted manually):
<clusternode ...><fence><method name="fabric">....</></>
the method name was originally fabric as i was going to use san fabric switching, but this did not work - ILO fencing works well for us however, so "inband" would be a more relevant name.
we are making changes that now result in configuration being updated via ccs_tool, which doesn't seem to provide an parameter to configure the method name, and defaults to "single" - so this is inconsistent with naming, but with no real functional affects on the config.
thanks again.
Please correct me if I am wrong
Regards
Rajagopal
--
Linux-cluster mailing list
Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
-- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
