Hi all, I've been investigating Pacemaker/Corosync for providing high availability for a wide range of applications. I found this combination to be very useful. Some of my applications require a fail-over cluster while others require load-balanced cluster.
I am wondering what are the best practices when managing the clusters for those applications. Currently, each application runs in a separate/dedicated cluster. I essentially have different corosync configurations, one per cluster. I am wondering if it is not better to setup 1 large Pacemaker cluster which is partitioned in such a way that certain resources are dedicated to a certain application (using node attribute expressions like in http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.0/html/Pacemaker_Explained/ch-rules.html#s-expression-attribute). There would only be 1 Corosync configuration, and the cluster is partitioned using some naming convention. It seems to me that this would simplify management. I wonder what people think about this approach. Many thanks in advance. Guillaume.
_______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
