Re: corosync 1.4.1 on Red Hat 6

[M K <m.kowalski1104@xxxxxxxxx>]

@Dan: I am setting up database failover cluster and checking how software reacts to stopping, killing, rebooting, etc. Trying to stop corosync first does not stop serving resources, however if I stop pacemaker after trying to stop corosync I cannot start corosync anymore without manual intervention - "corosync dead but subsys locked"

@Andrew: Can you please advise which version handles this situation correctly? Do I need to use 2.x.x branch?

Best Regards,

Marcin

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Andrew Beekhof <andrew@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 6:12 PM, M K <m.kowalski1104@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hello List,
>
> I have corosync/pacemaker on RHEL (6.3) machines with 3 resources
> configured:
>
> - VirtualIP
> - FS (SAN)
> - MySQL
>
> Scenario 1:
> - make sure that corosync/pacemaker is up and running on two nodes and
> serving these three resources
> - run /etc/init.d/corosync stop - never returns, but cluster continues
> serving resources on the same node

You can't stop corosync without stopping pacemaker first.
Corosync will refuse.

> - run /etc/init.d/pacemaker stop - pacemaker is stopped and corosync is dead
>
>
>
> Scenario 2:
> - make sure that corosync/pacemaker is up and running on two nodes and
> serving these three resources
> - run /etc/init.d/pacemaker stop
> - run /etc/init.d/corosync stop
>
>
> Should corosync/pacemaker handle both scenarios correctly?

It already is.

>
> Best Regards,
> Marcin
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>

_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss