Hi, OK so how does that affect the fail over. Each f the networks is important if we lose ring 0 or ring 1 we need to fail over. If I have the config stated below: # Please read the corosync.conf.5 manual page compatibility: whitetank totem { version: 2 secauth: on threads: 0 interface { ringnumber: 0 bindnetaddr: 10.251.96.160 #broadcast: yes mcastaddr: 239.254.6.8 mcastport: 5405 ttl: 1 } interface { ringnumber: 1 bindnetaddr: 10.122.147.192 #broadcast: yes mcastaddr: 239.254.6.9 mcastport: 5405 ttl: 1 } } logging { fileline: off to_stderr: no to_logfile: yes to_syslog: yes logfile: /var/log/cluster/corosync.log debug: off timestamp: on logger_subsys { subsys: AMF debug: off } } amf { mode: disabled } And I pull out the cable for the interface on ring 1 will it fail over ? Or will it use ring 1 only if ring 0 fails. I read the documentation but it is less than clear :-) I would just do it and pull the cable out but sadly it requires me to fly to Vienna to do it seems a little extravagant. From: emmanuel segura <emi2fast@xxxxxxxxx> Reply-To: linux clustering <linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 20:14:14 +0100 To: linux clustering <linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: corosync issue with two interface directives 2012/2/5 Ben Shepherd <bshepherd@xxxxxxxxx>
-- esta es mi vida e me la vivo hasta que dios quiera -- 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