This message was deleted.
# harvester
a
This message was deleted.
b
Kinda? It depends on what part is ha
If you're talking about service then no. For that , you might need even more than one vm to stay up at the same time for it to be ha.
Typically, though I think most people assume that HA means it's up all the time which you can't have without live migrations
h
The definition of HA I'm using is one node has a hardware failure and dies, causing the VMs that were on it to fail and then be restarted on a remaining node
basically automatic hot spare
b
rwx is only required for live migrations then. So as long as you're good with forcing a VM reboot to do maintenance on a node you should be fine without it
Just keep in mind that it might take a few minutes for the cluster to realize a node/vm is down.
I think there are settings for the tolerances, but I don't remember what they are.
h
yeah that's kind of what I thought, basically I'm using the VMWare definition of HA
as long as I can have VMs automatically restart on available nodes after a node failure that's all I need
b
Sure, but if the VM was in the middle of a block write, you might have some corruption and need a fsck.
h
they're going to be mostly windows VMs and on Linux I always set my fstab to fsck on startup. I understand that there is possible corruption in the event of a node failure, the goal is that the VMs should in most situations come up correctly