On 01/12/2012 05:21 PM, David Teigland wrote: > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 04:50:44PM +1100, Andrew Beekhof wrote: >>> The first view has historically been taken by corosync and pacemaker, >>> and the second by cman/gfs2. ?Folks with the first view would think >>> of a static node list as unnecessary, whereas it's the starting point >>> in the second view. >> >> Surely a gfs2 partition can be mounted from nodes that were unknown >> when it was formatted? > > The point is that I don't know who might come along and try to mount my > file system next! Yeah but why does it matter? before the node can mount, it needs to join the cluster and be quorate. By that time you know who is in the membership. > It's a free-for-all without a list of allowed nodes. I think i can understand your use case here, but my question is why is quorum in charge of that? Remember that this is not cman and that cman had 2 functions, one of membership management (that's the one you are really looking for, by allow/disallow a node) and quorum (calculated after membership management has kicked in). > > Maybe that's an important point that we've not drawn out yet. The list of > nodes also operates as a "permission list". Any node that's not listed > cannot join the cluster. I don't need to worry about some random or old > node coming along and intruding. > If anything, this has to happen either before quorum (at totem level or in between), or at a much higher level (application that care do it basically) since corosync doesn't really care, nor does pacemaker or the quorum module. Fabio _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
