[Pacemaker] questions about expected behaviour stonith:meatware

[Jelle de Jong]

On 16-06-11 08:38, Florian Haas wrote:
> 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.

Just to be sure. I understand meatware needs operator intervention.
However my problem was that there is no failover any-more... (this may
be the intended behaviour?).

I thought when both nodes A and B are running and node A is running the
resources. Node A dies, node B would takeover and A get fenced. But by
running meatware, it will fence A but will not take over the resources
until the operator intervenes... I did detect that when node A runs the
resources and node B dies node A keeps running the resources. (as
expected, but does not match the behaviour when the other node dies)

I was just expecting a fail-over would still work but the failed node
would be fenced and needed to be cleared, I tried this in a third node
set-up and a two node set-up. I also went back to a two node set-up for
my kvm host cluster because I got some unexplainable behaviour and went
back to keep it more KISS.

Thanks in advance,

Kind regards,

Jelle