The guide is intended to cover Active/Active setups. 

You are correct that regardless of the approach you take, a database has to be 
shared somehow.

In our experience DRBD works very well and is probably the least troublesome 
part of a PacketFence cluster.
But any approach which allows you to lose one node out of a cluster is probably 
good enough redundancy for most people.

You could have your database in a master/slave configuration.
That would work just as well although it may require more scripting or manual 
intervention.

There is no one-size fits all redundant deployment.
I encourage you to try another approach if you think it will suit you better 
and share your experience with the list.

Regards,
--
Louis Munro
[email protected]  ::  www.inverse.ca 
+1.514.447.4918 x125  :: +1 (866) 353-6153 x125
Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (www.sogo.nu) and PacketFence 
(www.packetfence.org)

> On Oct 26, 2015, at 18:17 , Dale Whiteaker-Lewis <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> I'm confused as to whether 
> http://www.packetfence.org/downloads/PacketFence/doc/PacketFence_Clustering_Guide-5.4.0.pdf
>  
> <http://www.packetfence.org/downloads/PacketFence/doc/PacketFence_Clustering_Guide-5.4.0.pdf>
>  represents the instructions for Active/Passive setup, or only Active/Active 
> setup.  I am interested in taking the least complicated approach--in addition 
> to the standalone configuration described in the other guides--to having a 
> fail-over option that can be switched over on the order of a couple of 
> minutes, not instantaneously, nor taking hours. 
> 
> I think that guide is telling me that even in an active/passive mode, the 
> active and passive servers need to share a database, and that to do so 
> reliably requires something like DRBD.  Is this a correct interpretation?  
> Because, I'd really like to avoid kernel mods and such, if active/passive can 
> be done without them.  
> 
> I've searched the mailing list, and I see relatively few references to DRBD, 
> but several references, including in May of this year, to synchronizing state 
> in other, scripted ways. 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> PacketFence-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
PacketFence-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users

Reply via email to