Hi Ken, thank you a big time for the feedback; much appreciated.
I suppose we go with a new *Scenario 3*: Setup 2 Clusters across different DCs connected by booth; so could you please clarify below points to me so i can understand better and start working on the architecture: 1- in case of separate clusters connected by booth: should each cluster have a quorum device for the Master/slave elections? 2- separate floating IPs at each cluster: please check the attached diagram and let me know if this is exactly what you mean? 3- To fail over, you update the DNS to point to the appropriate IP: can you suggest any guide to work on so we can have the DNS updated automatically? Regards Adil Bouazzaoui Le mar. 5 sept. 2023 à 16:48, Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com> a écrit : > Hi, > > The scenario you describe is still a challenging one for HA. > > A single cluster requires low latency and reliable communication. A > cluster within a single data center or spanning data centers on the > same campus can be reliable (and appears to be what Centreon has in > mind), but it sounds like you're looking for geographical redundancy. > > A single cluster isn't appropriate for that. Instead, separate clusters > connected by booth would be preferable. Each cluster would have its own > nodes and fencing. Booth tickets would control which cluster could run > resources. > > Whatever design you use, it is pointless to put a quorum tie-breaker at > one of the data centers. If that data center becomes unreachable, the > other one can't recover resources. The tie-breaker (qdevice for a > single cluster or a booth arbitrator for multiple clusters) can be very > lightweight, so it can run in a public cloud for example, if a third > site is not available. > > The IP issue is separate. For that, you will need separate floating IPs > at each cluster, on that cluster's network. To fail over, you update > the DNS to point to the appropriate IP. That is a tricky problem > without a universal automated solution. Some people update the DNS > manually after being alerted of a failover. You could write a custom > resource agent to update the DNS automatically. Either way you'll need > low TTLs on the relevant records. > > On Sun, 2023-09-03 at 11:59 +0000, Adil BOUAZZAOUI wrote: > > Hello, > > > > My name is Adil, I’m working for Tman company, we are testing the > > Centreon HA cluster to monitor our infrastructure for 13 companies, > > for now we are using the 100 IT license to test the platform, once > > everything is working fine then we can purchase a license suitable > > for our case. > > > > We're stuck at scenario 2: setting up Centreon HA Cluster with Master > > & Slave on a different datacenters. > > For scenario 1: setting up the Cluster with Master & Slave and VIP > > address on the same network (VLAN) it is working fine. > > > > Scenario 1: Cluster on Same network (same DC) ==> works fine > > Master in DC 1 VLAN 1: 172.30.9.230 /24 > > Slave in DC 1 VLAN 1: 172.30.9.231 /24 > > VIP in DC 1 VLAN 1: 172.30.9.240/24 > > Quorum in DC 1 LAN: 192.168.253.230/24 > > Poller in DC 1 LAN: 192.168.253.231/24 > > > > Scenario 2: Cluster on different networks (2 separate DCs connected > > with VPN) ==> still not working > > Master in DC 1 VLAN 1: 172.30.9.230 /24 > > Slave in DC 2 VLAN 2: 172.30.10.230 /24 > > VIP: example 102.84.30.XXX. We used a public static IP from our > > internet service provider, we thought that using a IP from a site > > network won't work, if the site goes down then the VIP won't be > > reachable! > > Quorum: 192.168.253.230/24 > > Poller: 192.168.253.231/24 > > > > > > Our goal is to have Master & Slave nodes on different sites, so when > > Site A goes down, we keep monitoring with the slave. > > The problem is that we don't know how to set up the VIP address? Nor > > what kind of VIP address will work? or how can the VIP address work > > in this scenario? or is there anything else that can replace the VIP > > address to make things work. > > Also, can we use a backup poller? so if the poller 1 on Site A goes > > down, then the poller 2 on Site B can take the lead? > > > > we looked everywhere (The watch, youtube, Reddit, Github...), and we > > still couldn't get a workaround! > > > > the guide we used to deploy the 2 Nodes Cluster: > > > https://docs.centreon.com/docs/installation/installation-of-centreon-ha/overview/ > > > > attached the 2 DCs architecture example, and also most of the > > required screenshots/config. > > > > > > We appreciate your support. > > Thank you in advance. > > > > > > > > Regards > > Adil Bouazzaoui > > > > Adil BOUAZZAOUI Ingénieur Infrastructures & Technologies > > GSM : +212 703 165 758 E-mail : adil.bouazza...@tmandis.ma > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Manage your subscription: > > https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > > > ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/ > -- > Ken Gaillot <kgail...@redhat.com> > > -- *Adil Bouazzaoui*
_______________________________________________ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/