On 12/10/2010 2:29 PM, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
>
>>>> What I
>>>> wanted was advice on the best platform that had a packaged, re-usable
>>>> setup available that was likely to be maintained in updates for a long
>>>> time.
>>>
>>> There's a bit of problem with your requirement: you forgot "supported".
>>> As in try getting any support here for version of heartbeat that ships
>>> with RHEL 5 (or Suse 10, as I understand).
>>
>> I'm not looking for support for my local environment. I'm looking for a
>> version that is reusable and works without local hacks. Or whatever
>> might be expected to work for a long time into the future if set up now.
>> But I suppose not changing interfaces wildly would be part of that
>> requirement so a packager can maintain it.
>
> You still didn't tell what you are building. I have a cluster of 2
> nodes running 2 instances of Apache for 3 years already. OS CentOS
> 5.5, Pacemaker + Heartbeat. Upgraded it couple of times without any
> issues. Is it long enough? I also support a couple of other clusters
> on CentOS 5.5.
Right now, all I have are a few instances of heartbeat floating a
fail-over IP address between pairs of boxes that don't really need any
state maintained (basically client-facing proxies) because that's all
I've trusted the old versions to handle. Everything else is behind load
balancers with data replication handled some other way. I'm sure I'd
find a lot more places to use paired fail-over systems if they were
simple to set up and included data replication. So at this point it is
more about building a test platform than making any specific application
work. But in the back of my head, I'm kind of wishing our developers
would adopt riak or a similar redundant/scalable data store and do away
with most of the need for specifically paired systems.
--
Les Mikesell
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
