On 15/07/2021 10:09, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais wrote:
Hi all,
On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 19:55:30 + (UTC)
Strahil Nikolov wrote:
In some cases the third location has a single IP and it makes sense to use it
as QDevice. If it has multiple network connections to that location - use a
full blown
Hi all,
On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 19:55:30 + (UTC)
Strahil Nikolov wrote:
> In some cases the third location has a single IP and it makes sense to use it
> as QDevice. If it has multiple network connections to that location - use a
> full blown node .
By the way, what's the point of multiple
Thank you all for your responses.I guess the decision should be based on the 3rd host's connectivity to the rest of the cluster. If the 3rd host can only communicate over a single network then I might as well use the QDevice, otherwise a full blown node would be preferable to take full advantage
On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 9:56 PM Strahil Nikolov
wrote:
> In some cases the third location has a single IP and it makes sense to use
> it as QDevice. If it has multiple network connections to that location -
> use a full blown node .
If you are intending to use watchdog-fencing via sbd with a
In some cases the third location has a single IP and it makes sense to use it
as QDevice. If it has multiple network connections to that location - use a
full blown node .
Best Regards,Strahil Nikolov
On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 20:44, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:
On 13.07.2021 19:52, Gerry R
On 13.07.2021 19:52, Gerry R Sommerville wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> I am currently comparing using QDevice vs adding a 3rd host to my
> even-number-node cluster and I am wondering about the details concerning
> network
> communication.
> For example, say my cluster is utilizing multiple
Hello everyone,
I am currently comparing using QDevice vs adding a 3rd host to my even-number-node cluster and I am wondering about the details concerning network communication.For example, say my cluster is utilizing multiple heartbeat rings. Would the QDevice take into account and use the IPs
