On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 5:28 AM, Florian Haas <[email protected]>wrote:

> On 2011-07-14 12:55, RNZ wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Florian Haas <[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> >     On 2011-07-14 08:46, RNZ wrote:
> >     > No, I want and I need - multi-master scheme (more then two
> nodes)...
> >
> >     There is nothing in Pacemaker's master/slave scheme that restricts
> you
> >     to a single master. The ocf:linbit:drbd resource agent, for example,
> is
> >     configurable in dual-Master mode.
> >
> >     Once the resource agent properly implements the functionality (the
> hard
> >     part), configuring a multi-master master/slave set is simply a
> question
> >     of setting the master-max meta parameter to a value greater than 1
> (the
> >     easy part).
> >
> > I don't think so... Couchdb RESTful API very easy allow running
> > repliacate by next scheme:
>
> It's entirely possible that the couchdb native API may be more powerful
> in specific regards, but if you want to put it into a Pacemaker cluster
> you may have to occasionally accept some minor limitations. That's a
> tradeoff which is present for all Pacemaker managed applications.
>
> > primitive cdb0
> >     hostA: hostB:dbB > localhost:dbB
> >     hostA: hostC:dbC > localhost:dbC
> >     hostA: hostD:dbD > localhost:dbD
> > primitive cdb1
> >     hostB: hostA:dbB > localhost:dbB
> > primitive cdb2
> >     hostC: hostA:dbC > localhost:dbC
> >
> > In this scheme hostA used as master for hostB and hostC (master-master)
> > and as slave for hostD (slave-master). Both (master-master and
> > slave-master for different servers/databases) scheme per one instance.
>
> So you mean there would be a cascading replication, like so:
>
>             hostD
>               |
>             hostA
>             /   \
>         hostB   hostC
>
> Such a thing is not something Pacemaker caters for specifically, but I
> dare say it doesn't need to, either. You would simply create one
> master/slave set where D is master and A is slave, and another where A
> is master and B and C are slaves.
>

Wouldn't such configuration mean  running 2 instances of a resource on
nodeA? I doubt that that would be a right solution.


> >     By the way, is there any specific reason you are contributing under a
> >     pseudonym? It's highly unusual in this community to do so.
> >
> >
> > Sorry, habit... My real name Alibek.Amaev, [email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]> or [email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>
>
> Pleased to meet you Alibek, welcome to the tribe. :)
>
> Cheers,
> Florian
>
>
> _______________________________________________________
> Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected]
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
>
>


-- 
Serge Dubrouski.
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/

Reply via email to