So I should be using "pcs cluster cib > file" to get the config and then "pcs cluster cib-push --config file" to push it?
Also I shouldn't have to add --config to the pcs -f commands right? On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 3:51 PM, Jan Pokorný <[email protected]> wrote: > On 21/07/16 13:52 -0500, Ken Gaillot wrote: > > On 07/21/2016 01:35 PM, Stephano-Shachter, Dylan wrote: > >> I want to put the pacemaker config for my two node cluster in puppet > >> but, since it is just one cluster, it seems overkill to use the corosync > >> module. If I just have puppet push cib.xml to each machine, will that > >> work? To make changes, I would just use pcs to update things and then > >> copy cib.xml back to puppet. I am not sure what happens when you change > >> cib.xml while the cluster is running. Is it safe? > > > > No, pacemaker checksums the CIB and won't accept a file that isn't > > properly signed. Also, the cluster automatically synchronizes changes > > made to the CIB across all nodes, so there is no need to push changes > > more than once. > > > > Since you're using pcs, the update process could go like this: > > > > # Get the current configuration: > > pcs cluster cib --config > cib-new.xml > > As I feel guilty for contributing to this misconception with clufter > "pcs commands" output at one point (also see > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1328078; still part of the blame > is in pcs I believe: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1328066), > something has just started screaming in me: > > DO NOT USE pcs cluster cib WITH --config LIKE SUGGESTED, BUT RATHER: > > pcs cluster cib > cib-new.xml > > > # Make changes: > > pcs -f cib-new.xml <whatever-command-you-want> > > <etc.> > > ...as otherwise the modifications like this ^ would fail. > > > # Upload the configuration changes to the cluster: > > pcs cluster cib-push --config cib-new.xml > > Note that with cib-push, --config is OK, moreover it's vital as you > really don't want to propagate stale status section and what not > when changing modifying configuration. > > Yes, it's counterintuitive to have this asymmetry and it could be > made to work with some added effort at the side of pcs with > the original, disapproved, sequence as-is, but that's perhaps > sound of the future per the referenced pcs bug. > So take this idiom as a rule of thumb not to be questioned > any time soon. > > > Using "--config" is important so you only work with the configuration > > section of the CIB, and not the dynamically determined cluster > > properties and status. > > (This, apparently, justifies just the cib-push use.) > > > > > The first and last commands can be done on any one node, with the > > cluster running. The "pcs -f" commands can be done anywhere/anytime. > > -- > Jan (Poki) > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list: [email protected] > http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org > Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf > Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org > >
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list: [email protected] http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
