On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 6:42 AM, Adrian Allen <[email protected]> wrote: >>Not quite yet. > >>I had a chat with Lon today and the "checkpoint" backend is close to >>what we want but requires cman and openais. >>Those two dependancies need to be removed. > >>Essentially you'll basically just be running corosync (instead of >>qpid) on the hosts (no need for pacemaker). >>If you happen to have some C skills I'd be happy to point you in the >>right direction. > > Fair enough, I'll continue to limp along. It's not unlikely that our devs > will work out a safe active/active arrangement in the near future and at > that point I won't really care about stonith anyway.
Someone else on the list was able to get the qpid approach working. Something to do with tweaking the brokers... Max can you elaborate for Adrian please? > > Unfortunately I haven't twiddled with C in about 17 years, or I might take > a crack at it. > > I do eagerly anticipate this working at some point though as there are a > few other places we could probably use it. > _______________________________________________ > 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
