On 10/16/07, Lars Marowsky-Bree <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2007-10-16T12:11:24, Ian Jiang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I want to use the hearbeat idea in an embedded environment. The > > current Linux heartbeat is too complicated, because an embedded > > system differs a lot with a general Linux cluster, and is > > usually much simpler and less of variability. So I am wondering > > whether there is other high available system using the heartbeat > > idea with simple architecture and is applicable for me as a > > reference. Open sources is better. Any suggestion is > > appreciated! > > You mean, whether there are other HA solutions? Of course. > > There keepalived, the RedHat Cluster Suite, some implementations of the > Service-Availability-Forum specifications ... Google will tell you more > about them ;-) > Thanks Lars very much! I am looking for HA solutions with heartbeat, in fact. I am going to see the details of the Redhat Cluster Suite and the Open Source Development Labs (OSDL)'s implementation of AIS of Service-Availability-Forum. Besides, I found two projects on SourceForge, OpenHA (http://open-ha-cluster.sourceforge.net/) and StrikeHA (http://sourceforge.net/projects/strike-ha/), which interest me a lot.
> But even Linux HA isn't too complicated for embedded systems; just > because the flexibility is there doesn't mean you've got to use it. You > could deploy a standarized configuration just the same. What is the simplest configuration if the availability of only one particular application (rather than the common web/mail services) need to be enhanced and the recovery progress (i.e. the start/stop/restart operation) is defined by myself? Are apphbd and heartbeat enough, according to the architecture introduced at http://www.linux-ha.org/BasicArchitecture? _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
