Hi all,
I'm currently working out a similar concept as Miki. The only difference
is that my cluster would NOT be in active/active.
Here is a brief description of my scenario:
1. Three geographically distinct locations: A,B and X. There are no WAN
connections. We have direct multiplexed fibr
... thoughts?
--
-Original Message-
From: Florian Haas [mailto:florian.h...@linbit.com]
Sent: Monday, 18 January 2010 9:36 PM
To: pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org
Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Split Site 2-way clusters
On 2010-01-18 11:14, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 11:44 PM
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 11:14:58AM +0100, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> > NodeX(Successfully) taking on data from clients while in
> > quorumless-freeze-still-providing-service, then discarding its hitherto
> > collected client data when realizing other node has quorum and discarding
> > own data isn’t g
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Florian Haas wrote:
>
> the current approach is to utilize 2 Pacemaker clusters, each highly
> available in its own right, and employing manual failover. As described
> here:
Thanks for the pointer! Perhaps "site" is not quite the correct term
for our setup, wher
On 2010-01-18 11:41, Colin wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> we are currently looking at nearly the same issue, in fact I just
> wanted to start a similarly titled thread when I stumbled over these
> messages…
>
> The setup we are evaluating is actually a 2*N-node-cluster, i.e. two
> slightly separated sites
Hi All,
we are currently looking at nearly the same issue, in fact I just
wanted to start a similarly titled thread when I stumbled over these
messages…
The setup we are evaluating is actually a 2*N-node-cluster, i.e. two
slightly separated sites with N nodes each. The main difference to an
N-nod
On 2010-01-18 11:14, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Miki Shapiro
> wrote:
>> Confused.
>>
>>
>>
>> I *am* running DRBD in dual-master mode
>
> /me cringes... this sounds to me like an impossibly dangerous idea.
> Can someone from linbit comment on this please? Am I ima
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Miki Shapiro
wrote:
> Confused.
>
>
>
> I *am* running DRBD in dual-master mode
/me cringes... this sounds to me like an impossibly dangerous idea.
Can someone from linbit comment on this please? Am I imagining this?
> (apologies, I should have mentioned
> that
ve is ... scary :)
From: Andrew Beekhof [mailto:and...@beekhof.net]
Sent: Thursday, 14 January 2010 7:56 PM
To: pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org
Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Split Site 2-way clusters
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 1:40 AM, Miki Shapiro
mailto:miki.shap...@coles.com.au>> wrote:
When you
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 1:40 AM, Miki Shapiro wrote:
> When you suggest:
>
> >>> What about setting no-quorum-policy to freeze and making the third
> node a full cluster member (that just doesn't run any resources)?
>
> That way, if you get a 1-1-1 split the nodes will leave all services
> runnin
ry 2010 7:24 PM
To: pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org
Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Split Site 2-way clusters
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 8:19 AM, Miki Shapiro
mailto:miki.shap...@coles.com.au>> wrote:
Separate to my earlier post re CRM DC election in a 2-way cluster, I'm chasing
up the (separat
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 8:19 AM, Miki Shapiro wrote:
> Separate to my earlier post re CRM DC election in a 2-way cluster, I’m
> chasing up the (separate) issue of making the cluster a CROSS-SITE one.
>
>
>
> As stated in yay other thread, I’m running a 2-way quorum-agnostic cluster
> on a SLES11,
Separate to my earlier post re CRM DC election in a 2-way cluster, I'm chasing
up the (separate) issue of making the cluster a CROSS-SITE one.
As stated in yay other thread, I'm running a 2-way quorum-agnostic cluster on a
SLES11, openais, pacemaker, drbd (... clvm, ocfs2, ctdb, nfs, etc) on HP
13 matches
Mail list logo
