On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 12:51 -0700, hj lee wrote: > Hi, > > If there are only two nodes in cluster and their IP addresses are > known a prior, then isn't it better to use TCP as a transport layer? > With heartbeat, there is a way to configure nodes before starting > cluster. Is TCP ever considered in corosync? >
Not sure why tcp would be a better transport layer for two nodes. TCP/IP's key driving design factor from Darpa was to remain operational and _mask faults_ (not detect faults) under nuclear attack where many network links and routing systems would be under considerable changing stress. As a result TCP/IP is very resilient to faulty networks and packet loss but does not provide suitable fault detection. Further there is not automatic node discovery in TCP/IP. In short, TCP/IP while highly versatile doesn't offer the best characteristics for cluster communication. Finally, Corosync is designed for nway redundant cluster configurations. The 2N model is a simplification of the nway redundant model and we don't provide special behaviors during 2N operation. Regards -steve > Thanks > hj > _______________________________________________ > Openais mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais _______________________________________________ Openais mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais
