Would it be correct to say that VMs running on NFS/local storage will not be affected if there is no SPM host.In other words,these VMs can still be started on a non SPM host (host 2) after host1 got fenced(SPM host before it got fenced).

On Wednesday, June 12, 2013, Marc Seward wrote: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: *Marc Seward* <linuxuser26(a)gmail.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', &#39;linuxuser26(a)gmail.com&#39;);&gt;&gt; Date: Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:06 PM Subject: Re: [Users] HA and SPM host To: Jiri Belka <jbelka(a)redhat.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', &#39;jbelka(a)redhat.com&#39;);&gt;&gt; Thank you very much for your response. I have noticed delays in the selection of the SPM host and attempts to run VMs even before SPM host is selected.AFAIU,that is incorrect behavior. On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Jiri Belka <jbelka(a)redhat.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', &#39;jbelka(a)redhat.com&#39;);&gt;&gt; wrote: On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 12:16:28 -0400 Marc Seward <linuxuser26(a)gmail.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', &#39;linuxuser26(a)gmail.com&#39;);&gt;&gt; wrote: > Hi all, > > In a 2 hypervisor setup,if host1 is fenced(host1 is also the SPM host) and > it has HA VMs running on it,would these VMs be started on host2 only after > host2 is elected as the SPM host? It would first try to migrate VMs and if this won't work if would fence SPM host and start HA VMs on other (now new SPM) host. j. _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users(a)ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users