On 06/22/2016 04:29 PM, Klaus Wenninger wrote: > On 06/22/2016 11:17 PM, Lentes, Bernd wrote:
>> I'm thinking about active/active. But i think active/passive with a >> non-cluster fs is less complicated. > But you will need something to control DRBD - especially in the > active/passive-case. > And the services/IPs would probably have to be pulled to the active side. It looks like with modern linux kernels you don't have to re-bind()/listen() anymore when an IP address is added. So you can start services bound to '*' from init and have pacemaker only manage the shared ip address. But yes, with active/passive DRBD you need something to control DRBD and mount DRBD FS and then start services that depend on DRBD FS. Active-active should let you have your filesystem mounted on both nodes at once and have things running from init. I never tried it myself so I don't know which of them would be "less complicated". -- Dimitri Maziuk Programmer/sysadmin BioMagResBank, UW-Madison -- http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org http://clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
