[Cluster-devel] cluster4 dlm dlm_stonith ??? should it really fence by turning node off?

Jacek Konieczny <[email protected]>
Newsgroups com.redhat.cluster-devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 11:10:17AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 03:58:28PM +0100, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > The dlm_stonith fencing helper is really convenient when Pacemaker is in
> > use. Though, it doesn't quite work as I would expect ??? when fencing 
> > is needed it requests a node to be turned off instead of rebooting. And
> > it doesn't handle unfencing ??? so automatic recovery is not possible
> > (rebooted node could join the cluster cleanly later, provided quorum
> > handling is properly configured in the cluster stack).
> > 
> > Preferably this behaviour should be configurable. I have hacked a
> > work-around by (ab)using argv[0] ??? when 'dlm_stonith' is called as
> > 'dlm_stonith_reboot' the node would be rebooted instead of halting 
> > ??? this works for me well-enough, but I don't think this is the right
> > solution.
> 
> Could you send the patch?  Do you think the patch is not right or reboot
> is not right?  If the later, what do you think is wrong with reboot?

I don't like the patch as probably it would be better to use extra
argument to the dlm_stonith invokation in the dlm_controld file. I did 
not fix it that way, as I was not sure how arguments are supposed to be
passed from dlm_controld configuration file to the fencing handlers.
I'll sent the patch anyway.

If reboot is wrong ? I have assumed the 'off' was chosen for purpose and
that my attempt to make it reboot instead could be a mistake. Though, I
found no reason why reboot would be worse.

Greets,
        Jacek
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.