[Drbd-dev] Another drbd race

Philipp Reisner philipp.reisner at linbit.com
Wed Sep 8 13:33:35 CEST 2004

On Wednesday 08 September 2004 13:20, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> On 2004-09-07T14:47:45,
>    Philipp Reisner <philipp.reisner at linbit.com> said:
> > No. It would be better to have a "drbdadm fence r0" operation on N2!
> > The "drbdadm fence r0" command would only set the "Outdated" flag.
> Well, it's automatically supposed to assume it's outdated when it
> crashes in S-P mode.
> When the secondary loses connection to the primary, a mark-peer-dead
> would prevent that flag from being set.
> So, why an explicit drbdadm fence operation? I'm missing what that would
> catch.

Here is the text you did not quote:

The big advantage over stopping DRBD on N2 is that in case the network
recoveres N2 will be resynced to up-to-date automatically.

: Dipl-Ing Philipp Reisner                      Tel +43-1-8178292-50 :
: LINBIT Information Technologies GmbH          Fax +43-1-8178292-82 :
: Schönbrunnerstr 244, 1120 Vienna, Austria    http://www.linbit.com :

More information about the drbd-dev mailing list