* [Cluster-devel] When is fencing considered successful?
@ 2008-10-29 16:12 Kevin Anderson
2008-10-29 16:22 ` David Teigland
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Kevin Anderson @ 2008-10-29 16:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: cluster-devel.redhat.com
Hi all,
Recently we had cluster customer where the fencing agent successfully
powered off a node, but the script failed to power the node back on due
to firmware changes on the fencing device.
Question is whether we should consider this a successful fence event or
does the agent have to complete everything? The primary purpose of the
fencing agent is to stop the node from participating in the cluster. In
this case, that was successful. But, because the power on attempt
failed, the fence agent reported failure and the cluster hung waiting
for a followup action.
It would seem to me that the fence agent should report success in this
case, and maybe post a warning message about the failure to power on.
Thoughts?
Kevin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [Cluster-devel] When is fencing considered successful?
2008-10-29 16:12 [Cluster-devel] When is fencing considered successful? Kevin Anderson
@ 2008-10-29 16:22 ` David Teigland
2008-10-31 19:44 ` Kevin Anderson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: David Teigland @ 2008-10-29 16:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: cluster-devel.redhat.com
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 11:12:41AM -0500, Kevin Anderson wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Recently we had cluster customer where the fencing agent successfully
> powered off a node, but the script failed to power the node back on due
> to firmware changes on the fencing device.
>
> Question is whether we should consider this a successful fence event or
> does the agent have to complete everything? The primary purpose of the
> fencing agent is to stop the node from participating in the cluster. In
> this case, that was successful. But, because the power on attempt
> failed, the fence agent reported failure and the cluster hung waiting
> for a followup action.
>
> It would seem to me that the fence agent should report success in this
> case, and maybe post a warning message about the failure to power on.
>
> Thoughts?
Definately
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [Cluster-devel] When is fencing considered successful?
2008-10-29 16:22 ` David Teigland
@ 2008-10-31 19:44 ` Kevin Anderson
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Kevin Anderson @ 2008-10-31 19:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: cluster-devel.redhat.com
On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 11:22 -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 11:12:41AM -0500, Kevin Anderson wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Recently we had cluster customer where the fencing agent successfully
> > powered off a node, but the script failed to power the node back on due
> > to firmware changes on the fencing device.
> >
> > Question is whether we should consider this a successful fence event or
> > does the agent have to complete everything? The primary purpose of the
> > fencing agent is to stop the node from participating in the cluster. In
> > this case, that was successful. But, because the power on attempt
> > failed, the fence agent reported failure and the cluster hung waiting
> > for a followup action.
> >
> > It would seem to me that the fence agent should report success in this
> > case, and maybe post a warning message about the failure to power on.
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> Definately
>
Okay, next question, do our fence agents behave this way?
Kevin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-10-31 19:44 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-10-29 16:12 [Cluster-devel] When is fencing considered successful? Kevin Anderson
2008-10-29 16:22 ` David Teigland
2008-10-31 19:44 ` Kevin Anderson
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).