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

[Digimer]

On 06/28/2013 09:28 AM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2013-06-28T21:01:55, Andrew Beekhof <andrew at beekhof.net> wrote:
> 
>>> I'd agree, but it's not multiple ports on the same device, it's multiple
>>> ports on *different* devices. I don't think a single fencing agent can
>>> handle that - it really looks like something only the higher level can
>>> cope with.
>> True, it wouldn't handle that case but the case itself seems needlessly complex to me.
>> Particularly since we've gotten by until very recently with single devices.
> 
> Well, I'm inclined to agree, but it seems that digimer's use case is
> also valid, and apparently quite widespread (especially for RHEL
> users?).

I preach this configuration to anyone who will listen. A few may have
joined the flock. ;)

> And I certainly don't want to be the one validating configurations like
> the one she posted ;-)
> 
> Basically, unless we can do this better, having multiple devices per
> fence topology level needs to be considered broken and might be better
> removed.

NO NO NO NO.

Please do not remove this. I can not use pacemaker unless I can keep the
power rails redundant. What we have now may not be elegant, but it
works. I would be a very sad panda if this functionality was removed.

-- 
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?