[Pacemaker] Fixed! - Re: Problem with dual-PDU fencing node with redundant PSUs

[Dejan Muhamedagic]

On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 12:18:23PM -0400, Digimer wrote:
> On 07/01/2013 08:19 AM, Vladislav Bogdanov wrote:
> >> Well its possible right now, it "just" not super pretty to configure.
> > I already set "Important" IMAP flag on that message and really willing
> > to copy that into my internal wiki ;)
> 
> This might be of use (note that I wrote it, not Andrew, so blame me for
> mistakes/typos).
> 
> http://clusterlabs.org/wiki/Fencing_topology

This is really very complex. Do you expect that somebody would
get that right? Doesn't fencing, as the ultimate mean to retain
sanity in the cluster, qualify for the keep it simple principle?

Cheers,

Dejan

> Also note that I will test without location constraints tomorrow and
> update the wiki to remove those steps. Feedback would be much appreciated.
> 
> >> > You should be able to leave out the location constraints though, that reduces the size a lot.
> > Yep, that requires a bit of thinking still.
> > 
> >> > 
> >> > And if people start using it, then we might look at simplifying it.
> > May be it's worth to have anonymous poll at clusterlabs.org for that?
> 
> It would be a skewed result. How many rhcs users even realize yet that a
> change to pacemaker is coming? How many who might use this won't have a
> reason to visit clusterlabs.org during the time the poll is up?
> 
> -- 
> Digimer
> Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/
> What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without
> access to education?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker at oss.clusterlabs.org
> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
> 
> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org