On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Gary Sedgwick <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have two identical basic Dell Poweredge R300 servers - when I say
> "basic", I mean no DRAC card, no redundant power supplies, etc.  Each has
> a smaller disk (120GB) and larger disk (1TB), as well as 2 NICs.  I'm
> planning to run (production) Apache/Tomcat/MySQL/DNS/e-mail services using
> a BlueOnyx VM.
>
> I've been experimenting with Proxmox (OpenVZ) and DRBD (in
> primary/secondary due to BlueOnyx requiring an ext3 filesystem) to
> replicate the larger 1TB disk (using the 2nd NIC on each server, connected
> with a crossover cable), both of which seem to successfully do what I
> want.  I've now been looking into how I could use Pacemaker for
> HA/failover (i.e. automatic takeover of IP and services in case of failure
> of a server)...
>
> The conclusion I'm rapidly coming to is that I'd probably be better off
> (less risk/complexity) configuring the machines to notify me in case of
> error, and to then manually shutdown and migrate VMs on the problem
> server.  Especially as I don't (or at least don't believe I) have suitable
> devices for fencing/STONITH, etc., and adding hardware (DRAC cards,
> redundant power supplies etc.) isn't an option.  So I have some questions
> that I would very much appreciate people lending their experience to:
>
> 1) Is it worth persevering with setting up Pacemaker/HA?  Am I able to set
> up a fairly simple (low risk) configuration that could provide automatic
> failover of services (not necessarily in all failure scenarios), even if
> not removing every single point of failure?

I believe so.

> 2) If so, is it possible to have a fairly "safe" configuration that would
> migrate services in common failure situations (in my experience, disk
> errors!) but that would not have the possibility of split brain etc.?

Well... you're using a crossover cable, so the risk of split-brain is
lower than normal.
But even with stonith you can't remove the possibility of split-brain
- stonith "just" gives you a sane way to keep hosting services when it
happens.
Perhaps no-quorum-policy=freeze could be of use in your scenario.

> 3) If not, it is easy to configure Pacemaker to simply alert a sysadmin of
> problems?

on-fail=block

>
> Many thanks for any advice.
>
> Gary
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
> See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
>
_______________________________________________
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