On 07/11/13 16:05, Jason Harley wrote:
On Nov 7, 2013, at 4:02 AM, Christine Caulfield <ccaulfie@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ccaulfie@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
What you have should be fine with the addition of "wait_for_all: 1".
You probably don't auto_tie_breaker unless there is a likelihood of a
2+2 split on the network.
"two_node" means you have exactly 2 nodes in the cluster (not ever
more) so isn't relevant and allow_downscale is solving a different
problem than you have.
With last_man_standing the cluster will survive being degraded to 1
node provided there is not a large outage and more than 2 nodes fail
at a time.
Thank you, Chrissie! ‘corosync-quorumtool’ now reports that my cluster
is quorate down to a single node with some quick testing. Pacemaker
(1.1.10+git20130802-1ubuntu1), however, seems to be ignoring Corosync’s
assertion that the cluster quorate with a single node.
That's odd. I just tested it on my system with a similar version and it
seemed fine. What is pacemaker saying exactly, and corosync-quorumtool ?
Chrissie
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
