On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Robinson, Eric <[email protected]> wrote: >> The way resources move around has nothing to do with how you >> setup corosync rings. For each ring, all nodes must be accessible >> over the interface specified in the interface section. >> How else can one form a ring? ;-) > > I think the confusion is entering the picture because (1) I'm using > back-to-back Ethernet connections for DRBD replication. Those are > point-to-point links from NODE1 to NODE3 and NODE2 to NODE3, but there > is no link necessary between NODE1 and NODE2 because there is no DRBD > replication between them. But (2) I am also using those links for > corosync communication because they are more reliable than using the > bonded interfaces through the switched network (although I am using > those too). > > So I guess what I'm trying to accomplish is to have three separate > corosync rings: > > -- Ring 1 through the switched network that includes all three nodes, > where pacemaker is configured with resource constraints to keep R1 and > R2 on their assigned node pairs. > > -- Ring 2 that includes NODE1 and NODE3 (logically a two-node "ring," > though technically just back-to-back) > > -- Ring 3 that includes NODE2 and NODE3 (logically a two-node "ring," > though technically just back-to-back) > > Does that make sense?
I'm probably missing something, but as far as I know DRBD doesn't use Corosync/OpenAIS. So Ring 2 and Ring 3 in your terminology are just network links for DRBD data replication, right? > > -- > Eric Robinson > > > Disclaimer - October 21, 2010 > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended > solely for General Linux-HA mailing list. If you are not the named addressee > you should not disseminate, distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views > or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and might > not represent those of Physicians' Managed Care or Physician Select > Management. Warning: Although Physicians' Managed Care or Physician Select > Management has taken reasonable precautions to ensure no viruses are present > in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or > damage arising from the use of this email or attachments. > This disclaimer was added by Policy Patrol: http://www.policypatrol.com/ > _______________________________________________ > Linux-HA mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems > -- Serge Dubrouski. _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
