On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 06:36:15PM +0200, Max Hofer wrote:
> I have a questiuon regarding the heartbeat messgage exchange.
> 
> Currently i have 2 cluster systems, each consisting of 2 node:
> - cluster A consists of nodes A1, A2
> - cluster B consists of nodes B1, B2
> 
> All 4 nodes are attached with bonded interface to a tow LAN
> switches SW1 and SW2 (lets call it normal LAN).
> 
> A1 and A2 (and B1 and B2) have a direct interconnection where
> the DRBD devices are syncronized plus a serial cable (lets call it
> DRBD LAN)
> 
> Thus currently cluster A (and B) use 3 different ways to exchange
> the heartbeat packages:
> - bcast ofer the DRDB LAN
> - ucast using normal lan
> - the serial cable
> 
> Now i figured out the cluster A needs states/data from cluster B 
> (and vice versa) for some fail-over decisions.

Bad luck :-/

> I see 2 possible solutions:
> a) wrting a resource agent which polls the state from the other cluster
> and i use this state

Interesting idea. Not sure how tricky it would be to do right.
Depends also what for you would use that state. I guess to restart
some resources.

> b) i configure 1 single cib.xml with 2 "sub-clusters"

This is an obvious solution, but probably you'd have to do some
rewiring, i.e. all nodes should be equally well connected with
each other.

> With sub-cluster i mean certain resource run only on cluster A and other
> resource run only on B.

I don't think that we have such a thing. The only option which
could be of help is to say that the cluster is asymmetrical, but
that won't buy you much either.

> My question now:
> * what will happen if one of the nodes is disconnected from the normal
> LAN - are the information tunnled over the redundant connections?
> 
> Scenario: A1 is disconnected from SW1. A2 still recieves HB packages 
> via the serial line and the DRBD LAN. Do B1 and B2 see A1 as dead or
> do the get the information about A1 via A2?

I don't think a node can get info about another node through a
third party. B1 and B2 will consider A1 gone. More, in this case,
they'd be a majority and the cluster would go on and reconsider
its options.

> maybe strange scenario but i have it (but unfortunatly i can not test it out
> because some external constraints .... managers! ;-)

It is interesting, but could turn out to be a PITA.

> kind regards Max
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
> See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

-- 
Dejan
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

Reply via email to