On 12/06/2013, at 12:08 AM, Andrew Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Michael Furman" <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 3:19:52 AM >> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Can I use Pacemaker release 1.1.8 for production >> clusters? >> >> >> >> Thank you for the reply! >> What problem you encounter in a production environment? >> What repository you added to download stable release 1.0.12 of >> Pacemaker? >> Do you have any conflicts with the dependencies of Pacemaker 1.0.12? >> >> Best regards, >> Michael >> >> >>> Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 18:36:34 -0500 >>> From: [email protected] >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Can I use Pacemaker release 1.1.8 for >>> production clusters? >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Florian Crouzat" <[email protected]> >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 10:01:35 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Can I use Pacemaker release 1.1.8 for >>>> production clusters? >>>> >>>> Le 10/06/2013 16:46, Michael Furman a écrit : >>>>> Hi all! >>>>> >>>>> According to the Wiki http://clusterlabs.org/wiki/Releases >>>> >>>> >>>> This page has not been updated since 10:49, 11 February 2011 >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Even numbered release series (eg. 0.6.x, 1.0.x) are recommended >>>>> for >>>>> production clusters. >>>>> >>>>> I need to install Pacemaker on Centos 6 machines. >>>>> Unfortunately, the main Centos repository contains only >>>>> 1.1.8-7.el6 >>>>> version. >>>>> >>>>> Questions: >>>>> Can I use Pacemaker release 1.1.8 for production clusters (we >>>>> want >>>>> to >>>>> work with the Centos repository)? >>>> >>>> I hope so >>>> >>>>> Do you expect to change existing features in 1.1.8? >>>> >>>> I believe it's not really a tech preview anymore since EL6.4 so >>>> I'd >>>> expect things not to move a lot anymore until RHEL7 >>>> >>>> >>>>> Do you have uncompleted features in 1.1.8? >>>>> >>>>> What repository contains Pacemaker release 1.0.12? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for your help, >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>> >>>> >>> Michael, >>> >>> I've run into some bugs running Pacemaker 1.1.8 in a production >>> environment. >>> I am currently waiting for Pacemaker 1.2.0 (the next stable series >>> release) >>> to be available for use in production clusters. The next >>> development release, >>> 1.1.10, which is due out soon will be very similar to what is >>> released as >>> 1.2.0. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Andrew >> > > Michael, > > The problems had to do with node membership (a node joining > the cluster twice with different names) and a bug that caused > pengine to die periodically. That was vanilla 1.1.8 though. RHEL6.4 has a highly patched version from upstream and does not suffer from the above problem. > For now I am just running the > clusters in maintenance mode (unmanaged) as I think Pacemaker > 1.0.x is too old for my use case. Agreed. 1.0 is getting on a bit now. > > I would recommend using Corosync 2.x with Pacemaker so that you > can obtain membership and quorum data from the same source for > all parts of the stack (#3 on this page): > http://blog.clusterlabs.org/blog/2012/pacemaker-and-cluster-filesystems/ As I say at the end of that post, you're best sticking with whatever the distro supports/tests. On RHEL, thats pacemaker+CMAN _______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list: [email protected] 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
