Hi Alan, I should probably state my overall objective for Linux-ha in my environment. Essentially, I plan to have multiple nodes running linux-ha. There will be probably seven apps that I wish to manage on these two boxes. 4 apps which run in an active/passive fashion, the other 3 will run active/active but with a twist. These three apps will always run on both nodes but will never need to tranfer from one node to another, as the load balancing is handled by the calling clients. What I am attempting to do is use Linux-ha to provide the framework for start/stop/monitoring only, as well as restarting the app if it should happen to fail. This is something that Veritas VCS provides for me today, however, the cost of VCS is extravagant to say the least. VCS does this by allowing you to specify which nodes are relevent to the resource group at the service group level. Version 2 of Linux-HA is a major upgrade from version 1 and so far it looks very promising. Bob ------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 01:23:19 -0700
From: Alan Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Linux-ha-dev] Active Active Cluster
To: High-Availability Linux Development List
<[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Robert Szabo wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I am trying to setup a number of active/active resource groups where the
> app runs simultaneously on both nodes.
>
> The start/stop/monitor script is identical on both machines, and the
> install directory is identical on both nodes.
>
> I have named my test nodes as sid and nancy.
>
> This is the chain of events when I startup the apps on sid:
>
> 1) monitor action takes place on primitve for group named_grp_sid
> 2) monitor action takes place on primitve for group named_grp_nancy
> 3) stop action takes place on primitve for group named_grp_sid
> 4) stop action takes place on primitve for group named_grp_nancy
> 5)start action takes place on primitve for group named_grp_sid
> ** all the above takes place on sid **
>
> When I bring things up on nancy i get:
>
> 1) monitor action takes place on primitve for group named_grp_sid
> 2) monitor action takes place on primitve for group named_grp_nancy
> 3) stop action takes place on primitve for group named_grp_sid *** it
> seems to tell sid to stop this ***
> 4) stop action takes place on primitve for group named_grp_nancy
> 5)start action takes place on primitve for group named_grp_nancy
> 6) start action takes place on primitive for group named_grp_sid ***
> this action takes place on sid***
>
>
>
> My questions now are:
>
> 1) how to I make it so that no actions for groups designated for node
> nancy take place on sid and vice versa?
You mean, that they _never_ take place on the other machine? Or that
you want them to prefer being located on the right machines if they're up?
> 2) How do I keep nancy from telling sid to stop and restart the group
> associated with sid?
>
>
> I am sure its something that I am missing in the way constraints work.
> If anyone can shed light on how I can achieve that, it would be greatly
> appreciated.
--
Alan Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Openness is the foundation and preservative of friendship... Let me
claim from you at all times your undisguised opinions." - William
Wilberforce
------------------------------
<<winmail.dat>>
_______________________________________________________ Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
