[Linux-cluster] GFS on SAN, does a quorum make sense?
Dan B. Phung
phung at cs.columbia.edu
Thu May 5 23:01:23 UTC 2005
actually, it doesn't even work with what I thought I could do, which is to
have each node have a vote count equal to the quorum, since the vote count
is summed and halved. ...you guys are tricky ;)
so help is needed, or maybe a pointer to a thread on where this has
been discussed previously.
On 5, May, 2005, Dan B. Phung declared:
> Hello, I was wondering if a quorum makes sense when I have one underlying
> shared device. My setup is this:
> blade1 b2 b3 b4 b5 .....
> \ | | | | | | /
> [ fiber switch module ]
> | |
> and I want any blade to be able to access the storage at anytime. right
> now I have my configuration such that each node has the number of votes
> equivalent to the quorum. Does this make sense? From my understanding,
> the quorum/voting procedure is to prevent split-brain scenarios where two
> nodes coming up for the first time might try to form two separate clusters
> of the same name, which will cause data corruption. How would I prevent
> that, while still allowing any one node, even by itself, to access the
> storage media.
> Another use of the quorum is for distributed disks in the case of a node
> failure the I/O to that disk is fenced. Is that correct?
More information about the Linux-cluster