Alain, passive mode is much better tested. Another big plus of passive is, that if one network becomes faulty, passive makes progress (one packet is send thru active device, another via faulty - this is not delivered but resend via active device, ...). Active RRP waits until enough failures and then marks device/ring failed. In this meantime, there is no progress (packet must be delivered via both interfaces).
Moullé Alain napsal(a): > Hi, > > the man page of corosync.conf gives : > > "Active replication offers slightly lower latency from transmit to > delivery in faulty network environments but with less performance. > Passive replication may nearly double the speed of the totem protocol if > the protocol doesn’t become cpu bound" > > OK but knowing that, could someone give the pro & cons for passive mode, > and the pro & cons for active mode, > and/or how must we choose the real better mode for a HA cluster ? > Passive. It's only one supported. > Thanks a lot > Alain > Regards, Honza _______________________________________________ Openais mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais
