Description of problem:
Need Pacemaker to control the Mon service on the Controller Nodes, right now Mon would be managed by Systemd, not by Pacemaker
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
Is the goal to have pacemaker start/restart ceph mon on one node or have the service and IP fail over between nodes?
Ok to close this, or is this still relevant? I am missing the background on why this was desired.
This bug has just now been brought to my attention.
Are we talking about https://sourceforge.net/projects/mon/ ?
Or ceph-mon Keith thought?
Or something else entirely?
Andrew, we are discussing the ceph-mon process from the Ceph project.
This daemon currently runs on the Cloud controllers.
Not sure if this feature is still desired by the Ceph engineering team since we are usually not running Pacemaker on the nodes running Ceph Monitors.
There is no failover mechanism that should be configured for this service. So this will just be a clone in Pacemaker.
I don't think it hurts though to have ceph-mon managed by Pacemaker, where Pacemaker will "simply" act as a watchdog.
We have this process managed by systemd in Red Hat Ceph Storage 2.0. Systemd already knows how to watchdog a process so I think we should just close this one.
On balance, I don't think it makes sense to add it to the (Pacemaker) cluster given that the direction for OSP10 is to drop all the openstack clones out from the cluster and use systemd to watchdog them instead.
If it was an active/passive resource, that might be different.
Ok great, so since with have all the necessary unit files for that, I think we can close this one.
Thanks for the prompt reply Andrew.
As long as it properly handles upgrade & update I am fine.