I've decided to stick with sun grid engine as it seems most appropriate for what i'm doing. I earlier thought that hlds was crashing with my setup, but apparently the servers were shut down prematurely. Everything with it works fine now.
> I actually played with an active/passive HLDS cluster last month. It's > incredibly easy and worked perfectly the first time. But as mentioned, it > does take a hit during a failover event. This is where I stopped, and > decided a compute utility or grid scenario would be more appropriate... > just > haven't had the urge to check it out. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of kama > Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 11:00 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] HLDS Cluster > > > Isnt it easier to "calculate" if the hlds fits on a server before enabling > the service? Or have a predifined sollution and depending on what the > theoretical max usage will be, open up on a machine that have enough > power? > > Since hlds is not suited for a cluster sollution, why try to force it to > do > so? > > A HA sollution might be interesting just so the service is always up and > running. but then you have to take into account that it will be a small > downtime when you roll up the service on the other node. > > /Bjorn > > On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, Marcel wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I tested this one or two years ago and it caused lagg while >> transfering the process to another node. After this "transfer" >> everything > was fine. >> >> So you should manually do the transfers to another server. >> >> >> - Marcel >> >> Jonathan schrieb: >> > Hi, I've been using a cluster-like setup to start counter-strike >> > servers on demand for a while, but it's never really worked that >> > well. At the moment i use sun grid engine 6, but i was thinking of >> > using something like openmosix instead. Any thoughts on this? If i >> > use (open)mosix i need to use the 2.4 kernel, which i heard doesn't > perform as well as 2.6 for hlds. >> > >> > Is there any other alternative available? The key idea is the launch >> > a server immediately as someone presses a button on a website, >> > without having to care about load on the boxes. Right now i have 22 >> > diskless server nodes in the cluster. >> > >> > OM also seems like a good idea since i will be able to expand it >> > while it's running without downtime or problems. >> > >> > One thing i'm not sure about OM is whether the load-sharing thing is >> > good or not. Ie, if a node gets overloaded, it moves processes to a >> > node with less load, if one exists. A move like this when the >> > process is hlds will probably cause a lot of lag for the players. >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: >> > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux >> > >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: >> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux >> > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
