Hi,
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 01:40:34PM -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 12/10/2010 12:53 PM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> >
> > No-one is suggesting all clusters should run on Fedora. I was clearly
> > trying to say that instructions for A are unlikely to work unmodified
> > for B.
>
>
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 09:27:15AM +0100, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 10:53 PM, Bart Coninckx
> wrote:
> > On Thursday 09 December 2010 22:21:57 Pavlos Parissis wrote:
> >> On 9 December 2010 17:09, Igor Chudov wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 9:31 AM, Dimitri Maziuk
Bart Coninckx wrote:
> On Monday 13 December 2010 17:36:05 Serge Dubrouski wrote:
>
>> BTW, here is one more Open Source alternative to Pacemaker for those
>> who're building HA storage systems: http://www.openfiler.com/
> It uses DRBD and Heartbeat if I'm not mistaking, so "alternative" might
On Monday 13 December 2010 17:36:05 Serge Dubrouski wrote:
> BTW, here is one more Open Source alternative to Pacemaker for those
> who're building HA storage systems: http://www.openfiler.com/
>
> But I really doubt that it's easy ti learn and set up.
>
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 6:06 AM, Pieter
BTW, here is one more Open Source alternative to Pacemaker for those
who're building HA storage systems: http://www.openfiler.com/
But I really doubt that it's easy ti learn and set up.
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 6:06 AM, Pieter Baele wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 20:39, Igor Chudov wrote:
>> On
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 20:39, Igor Chudov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
>> Taking into account "simple" the answer is no. You can try RedHat
>> Cluster Suite on CentOS, but that's not simple.
>>
>> What's wrong with DRBD/Pacemaker/Corosync ?
>
> DRBD/Pacemaker wa
On Friday 10 December 2010 16:40:16 Serge Dubrouski wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 7:47 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> > On 12/10/10 8:32 AM, Vadym Chepkov wrote:
> >> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Igor Chudov wrote:
> > This does not at all back up your claim that there is no
> > documen
On 12/10/2010 2:06 PM, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
>
> What's wrong with RHEL5? You can use packages from
> http://www.clusterlabs.org/rpm
> Yes they don't support dual-master filesystem with OCFS2, but do you
> really need it?
>
> BTW, packaging for RHEL5 really sucks. Lots of things are really
> outda
Serge Dubrouski wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Dimitri Maziuk
> wrote:
>> Les Mikesell wrote:
>> ...
>>> What I
>>> wanted was advice on the best platform that had a packaged, re-usable
>>> setup available that was likely to be maintained in updates for a long
>>> time.
>> There's a b
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 12/10/2010 2:29 PM, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
>>
> What I
> wanted was advice on the best platform that had a packaged, re-usable
> setup available that was likely to be maintained in updates for a long
> time.
There'
On 12/10/2010 2:29 PM, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
>
What I
wanted was advice on the best platform that had a packaged, re-usable
setup available that was likely to be maintained in updates for a long
time.
>>>
>>> There's a bit of problem with your requirement: you forgot "supported
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 12/10/2010 1:54 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
>> Les Mikesell wrote:
>> ...
>>> What I
>>> wanted was advice on the best platform that had a packaged, re-usable
>>> setup available that was likely to be maintained in updates for a long
>>> time
On 12/10/2010 1:54 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
> ...
>> What I
>> wanted was advice on the best platform that had a packaged, re-usable
>> setup available that was likely to be maintained in updates for a long
>> time.
>
> There's a bit of problem with your requirement: you forg
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
> ...
>> What I
>> wanted was advice on the best platform that had a packaged, re-usable
>> setup available that was likely to be maintained in updates for a long
>> time.
>
> There's a bit of problem with your requireme
Les Mikesell wrote:
...
> What I
> wanted was advice on the best platform that had a packaged, re-usable
> setup available that was likely to be maintained in updates for a long
> time.
There's a bit of problem with your requirement: you forgot "supported".
As in try getting any support here f
On 12/10/2010 12:53 PM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>
> No-one is suggesting all clusters should run on Fedora. I was clearly
> trying to say that instructions for A are unlikely to work unmodified
> for B.
So perhaps the appropriate question would be where to find the
instruct
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 12/10/2010 11:30 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>>
No-one is suggesting all clusters should run on Fedora. I was clearly
trying to say that instructions for A are unlikely to work unmodified
for B.
>>>
>>> So perhaps the appropria
On 12/10/2010 11:30 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>
>>> No-one is suggesting all clusters should run on Fedora. I was clearly
>>> trying to say that instructions for A are unlikely to work unmodified
>>> for B.
>>
>> So perhaps the appropriate question would be where to find the
>> instructions for B -
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 4:42 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 12/10/2010 9:27 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>> On 12/10/10 2:20 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> See "LRM operation WebSite_start_0 unknown error" from November, that's
> where
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 7:47 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>> On 12/10/10 8:32 AM, Vadym Chepkov wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Igor Chudov wrote:
>>>
>
>> This does not at all back up your claim that there is no documentation.
>> All this show
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 12/10/2010 9:27 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>> On 12/10/10 2:20 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> See "LRM operation WebSite_start_0 unknown error" from November, that's
> where
On 12/10/2010 9:27 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On 12/10/10 2:20 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>>>
See "LRM operation WebSite_start_0 unknown error" from November, that's
where your pdf led me. By the time I hit "unknown error" starting
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 7:47 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 12/10/10 8:32 AM, Vadym Chepkov wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Igor Chudov wrote:
> This does not at all back up your claim that there is no documentation.
> All this shows is that EPEL5 (what you tried it on)
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 12/10/10 2:20 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>>
>>> See "LRM operation WebSite_start_0 unknown error" from November, that's
>>> where your pdf led me. By the time I hit "unknown error" starting drbd
>>> resource -- set up exactly as you describe
On 12/10/10 8:32 AM, Vadym Chepkov wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Igor Chudov wrote:
>>>
>>>
This does not at all back up your claim that there is no documentation.
All this shows is that EPEL5 (what you tried it on) is different from
Fedora-13 (what the guide was written
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Igor Chudov wrote:
>>
>>
>> > This does not at all back up your claim that there is no documentation.
>> > All this shows is that EPEL5 (what you tried it on) is different from
>> > Fedora-13 (what the guide was written for).
>>
>> Who would use fedora for anything
>
>
> > This does not at all back up your claim that there is no documentation.
> > All this shows is that EPEL5 (what you tried it on) is different from
> > Fedora-13 (what the guide was written for).
>
> Who would use fedora for anything that needed a highly available server?
>
>
I would not, as
On 12/10/10 2:20 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>
>> See "LRM operation WebSite_start_0 unknown error" from November, that's
>> where your pdf led me. By the time I hit "unknown error" starting drbd
>> resource -- set up exactly as you describe, I've spent close to a week
>> trying to replicate the setu
Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Igor Chudov wrote:
>
>> I would like to know if there are relatively straightforward Linux
>> based alternatives to DRBD and heartbeat.
>>
>>
>>
> It occurs to me that I've yet to see an actual answer to the original
> poster's question. I've seen lots of
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 10:53 PM, Bart Coninckx wrote:
> On Thursday 09 December 2010 22:21:57 Pavlos Parissis wrote:
>> On 9 December 2010 17:09, Igor Chudov wrote:
>> > On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 9:31 AM, Dimitri Maziuk
> wrote:
>> >> See "LRM operation WebSite_start_0 unknown error" from November,
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
> On 12/9/2010 4:05 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Igor Chudov wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
Taking into account "simple" the answer is no. You can try RedHat
Cluster
On Thursday 09 December 2010 22:21:57 Pavlos Parissis wrote:
> On 9 December 2010 17:09, Igor Chudov wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 9:31 AM, Dimitri Maziuk
wrote:
> >> See "LRM operation WebSite_start_0 unknown error" from November, that's
> >> where your pdf led me. By the time I hit "unknow
Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Igor Chudov wrote:
>> I would like to know if there are relatively straightforward Linux
>> based alternatives to DRBD and heartbeat.
In theory you could try setting up raid-1 with mdadm where one of the
devices is an iscsi target. That's for drbd -- and you could probably
On 9 December 2010 17:09, Igor Chudov wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 9:31 AM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
>> See "LRM operation WebSite_start_0 unknown error" from November, that's
>> where your pdf led me. By the time I hit "unknown error" starting drbd
>> resource -- set up exactly as you describe,
On 12/09/2010 08:12 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
> Florian Haas wrote:
>>
>> Pacemaker, however, has superseded Heartbeat v2 over a year and a half
>> ago, and you should be using it, either on top of Heartbeat 3 or on top
>> of Corosync.
>
> I think if you actually bothered to look at the thread I r
Florian Haas wrote:
>
> Pacemaker, however, has superseded Heartbeat v2 over a year and a half
> ago, and you should be using it, either on top of Heartbeat 3 or on top
> of Corosync.
I think if you actually bothered to look at the thread I refer to,
you'd've seen it was about heartbeat 3.0.3 wit
Igor Chudov wrote:
> I would like to know if there are relatively straightforward Linux
> based alternatives to DRBD and heartbeat.
>
It occurs to me that I've yet to see an actual answer to the original
poster's question. I've seen lots of dicussion about DRBD, heartbeat,
and pacemaker/coro
On 12/09/2010 04:31 PM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
> On 12/9/2010 4:05 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Igor Chudov wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
Taking into account "simple" the answer is no. You can try RedHat
Cluster Suite on
Igor Chudov wrote:
> Dima, I have a question. If you simultaneously reboot both drbd
> servers that are controlled by haresources, does it ever happen that
> neither node becomes master?
Yes, they tend to go into split brain if you reboot them too close
together. Doesn't seem to happen if I wait
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 5:09 AM, Igor Chudov wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 9:31 AM, Dimitri Maziuk
> wrote:
> > See "LRM operation WebSite_start_0 unknown error" from November, that's
> > where your pdf led me. By the time I hit "unknown error" starting drbd
> > resource -- set up exactly as y
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 9:31 AM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
> See "LRM operation WebSite_start_0 unknown error" from November, that's
> where your pdf led me. By the time I hit "unknown error" starting drbd
> resource -- set up exactly as you describe, I've spent close to a week
> trying to replicate th
On 12/9/2010 4:05 AM, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Igor Chudov wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
>>> Taking into account "simple" the answer is no. You can try RedHat
>>> Cluster Suite on CentOS, but that's not simple.
>>>
>>> What's wrong
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Igor Chudov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
>> Taking into account "simple" the answer is no. You can try RedHat
>> Cluster Suite on CentOS, but that's not simple.
>>
>> What's wrong with DRBD/Pacemaker/Corosync ?
>
> DRBD/Pacemaker
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 10:36 PM, James Smith wrote:
> I've spent the last several months learning drbd, pacemaker etc ... drbd
> itself is surprisingly simple to get up running. Im yet to experience
> significant problems with it.
>
> Pacemaker has documentation, but I've certainly found it a t
Fajar Priyanto wrote:
>
> Wow don't scare me, man! So far my golden rule is: Don't fix it if
> it's not broken. But, I'm required to update my machine if there's
> security high-vuln.
> Decision.. decision... ^^
It's OK when you know. I didn't notice until after the upgrade and
reboot of both no
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 6:03 AM, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
> We have a netapp fas2020: it's expensive, not open-sores or lignux
> based, but compared to heartbeat/drbd it can easily be cheap at the
> price. Especially if you come to work one Sunday afternoon to run "yum
> update" on the fileservers and
Igor Chudov wrote:
> Florian, it is very possible that I overlooked some valuable
> documentation. It is also possible that things have improved since I
> tried it last summer.
Having gone through the exercise recently: not really, no. Old-style
configs still work as of 3.0.3, though.
> However,
I've spent the last several months learning drbd, pacemaker etc ... drbd itself
is surprisingly simple to get up running. Im yet to experience significant
problems with it.
Pacemaker has documentation, but I've certainly found it a tad difficult to
locate, in the initial days at least of start
Florian, it is very possible that I overlooked some valuable
documentation. It is also possible that things have improved since I
tried it last summer.
However, at present, my question was to locate and consider
alternatives to drbd and heartbeat.
I will peruse the links that you provided, as, pr
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Igor Chudov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Igor Chudov wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
Taking into account "simple" the answer is no. You can try RedHat
>
On 12/08/2010 08:39 PM, Igor Chudov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
>> Taking into account "simple" the answer is no. You can try RedHat
>> Cluster Suite on CentOS, but that's not simple.
>>
>> What's wrong with DRBD/Pacemaker/Corosync ?
>
> DRBD/Pacemaker was comp
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Igor Chudov wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
>>> Taking into account "simple" the answer is no. You can try RedHat
>>> Cluster Suite on CentOS, but that's not simple.
>>>
>>>
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Igor Chudov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
>> Taking into account "simple" the answer is no. You can try RedHat
>> Cluster Suite on CentOS, but that's not simple.
>>
>> What's wrong with DRBD/Pacemaker/Corosync ?
>
> DRBD/Pacemaker
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Serge Dubrouski wrote:
> Taking into account "simple" the answer is no. You can try RedHat
> Cluster Suite on CentOS, but that's not simple.
>
> What's wrong with DRBD/Pacemaker/Corosync ?
DRBD/Pacemaker was complicated, documentation did not exist or did not
match
Taking into account "simple" the answer is no. You can try RedHat
Cluster Suite on CentOS, but that's not simple.
What's wrong with DRBD/Pacemaker/Corosync ?
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Igor Chudov wrote:
> I am interested in finding out Open Source alternative that would
> replace both DRB
I am interested in finding out Open Source alternative that would
replace both DRBD as well as Heartbeat. I am definitely NOT looking
for pacemaker either.
I am looking for something simple, just file serving ability and
switching NFS and samba would be all I need.
igor
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:
The question is too broad. Are you interested in Open Source or
proprietary product? What do you want to achieve?
One of the answers could be AoE (ATA over Ethernet) + OCFS2.
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Igor Chudov wrote:
> I would like to know if there are relatively straightforward Linux
On Wednesday 08 December 2010 19:26:53 Igor Chudov wrote:
> I would like to know if there are relatively straightforward Linux
> based alternatives to DRBD and heartbeat.
>
> Any pointers and suggestions will be gratefully accepted.
Yes. DRBD and pacemaker.
See: www.clusterlabs.org
--
Dr. Micha
I would like to know if there are relatively straightforward Linux
based alternatives to DRBD and heartbeat.
Any pointers and suggestions will be gratefully accepted.
Thanks
i
___
Linux-HA mailing list
Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.
59 matches
Mail list logo
