[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: openais
Subject: Re: [Openais] does self-fencing makes sense?
From: Dietmar Maurer <dietmar () proxmox ! com>
Date: 2010-02-25 12:06:57
Message-ID: 90D306BE6EBC8D428A824FBBA7A3113D06B2491AC2 () ronja ! maurer-it ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
Do you have an idea whats the best place to implement self fencing? Can
we simply use softdog inside the quorum service (to trigger a reboot
when we lose quorum? or is that too simple? Or is fenced the better place?
- Dietmar
> > But what I've heard so far is that many users do not understand
> > why fencing is required, and worse, they do not configure and test
> > it correctly.
> >
> > So the question is if we can combine those approaches? Or is that
> > mutual exclusive for some reason?
> >
>
> It would be beneficial to have implementations that supported one or
> the
> other or both models at the same time. Maximum flexibility for the
> user. Then the user can decide what their viewpoint is on reliability
> just as I have outlined in this previous thread. If they are super
> paranoid, they might use both. If they believe simplicity is superior,
> they might choose self fencing. If they feel that operating in a well
> defined operating environment with more complexity is better, they
> could
> choose that.
>
> Currently there are two choices 1) power fencing 2) no fencing.
>
> Regards
> -steve
>
>
> > - Dietmar
> >
> >
>
_______________________________________________
Openais mailing list
Openais@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic