> Am Mittwoch, 3. Juni 2009 12:52:14 schrieb [email protected]: > > Hello all. > > > > > > > > Is there now any use to having the 2nd interface connected with HA? > > Redundancy in the heartbeat path.
Previously I've used Heartbeat with SLES 10.x but I'm now very firmly on SLES 11 with OpenAIS. Does the same still apply? > > > When previously configuring servers with HB 2.1.3, LVS and ldirectord I > > had the resources listeing on eth1 and had heartbeat communicate over > > eth0 on both servers to try and cut down on noise. > > If you do not want to have the broadcast traffic on your net, use the > ucast > statement in ha.cf > > > Is there any reason to do this and if so in what way would you set it up > > using single HA resources in a 2-node HA cluster? > > Use: Redundancy of heartbeat path. > > Setup: > on node1: > bcast eth0 > ucast eth1 <ip address of node2 on eth0> > > on node2: > bcast eth0 > ucast eth1 <ip address of node1 on eth0> > > But anyway, using the resources net for heartbeat communication is not the > best idea. Better add a interface card to you server and user additionally > eth2. > > By the way: When adding a new IF to the node you also could upgrade from > 2.1.3 > to pacemaker. > > Greetings, Thanks for the reply and the answers given. I should have explained that our first foray into Linux-HA was with SLES 10.2 using heartbeat, LVS and ldirectord. This is in live use and working great(ish). We are now designing many more clusters using SLES 11 HAE with Pacemaker 1.0.3 and OpenAIS. It seems a world apart from the old stuff and seems much better. In the old stuff I used ucast over the 1 NIC and resource traffic over the other. With OpenAIS / Pacemaker I can't see if there is still any reason to do that. > Regards Darren _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
