[Pacemaker] questions about expected behaviour stonith:meatware

[Florian Haas]

On 06/16/2011 12:50 AM, imnotpc wrote:
>> Funny but it looks fairly unequivocal to me.
> 
> 
> Yes and no. The message is clear but unless you have someone sitting at
> a console 24/7 running tail on the log file, it has little value.
> According to the ClusterLabs stonith docs (which I just realized you
> wrote, haha):

Meatware requires operator intervention, that much is a given.
_Notifying_ an operator that intervention is necessary, beyond logging
to the console or a log file, is beyond meatware's domain.

However, it's extremely easy to combine meatware with automated
monitoring: any time a node is meatware-fencing another, it creates a
socket file named /var/run/meatware.<hostname>, where hostname is the
name of the node being fenced. Configure your automated monitoring to
page an operator any time this file is present, and you've solved the
notification problem.

Hope this is useful.

Cheers,
Florian

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/pacemaker/attachments/20110616/8b55fd45/attachment-0004.sig>