I set up a three-node cluster where node C acts as a secondary for both nodes A and B for different resources. Node A & C own resource R1 while nodes B & C own resource R2. If either node A or node B go down, node C takes over primary for the failed node while continuing as secondary for the non-failed node. Since I was able to get this to work, I assume it is a legal and supported configuration, but it now occurs to me belatedly to ask if this is true. Are there caveats I should be especially concerned about in this configuration?
-- Eric Robinson Disclaimer - October 7, 2010 This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for [email protected]. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and might not represent those of Physicians' Managed Care or Physician Select Management. Warning: Although Physicians' Managed Care or Physician Select Management has taken reasonable precautions to ensure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising from the use of this email or attachments. This disclaimer was added by Policy Patrol: http://www.policypatrol.com/ _______________________________________________ drbd-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user
