On Nov 9, 2007, at 7:05 PM, Ivan wrote:
Andrew Beekhof wrote:
Which is why 2 node clusters are not a very good idea :-)
In a 3-node cluster the disconnected node wont have quorum and isn't
allowed to try and kill anyone.
Excuse me for the interruption...
I think the majority of the users have 2 node clusters at least that's
what everybody starts with according to the messages. As I
understand in
a 2 node cluster the only way to prevent the issue mentioned is to
avoid
losing the connection between the nodes right.
or use quorumd, but i dont personally know how that works
So if there's a possibility of losing 2 switches shouldn't we set up
serial communication as well?
yes, that (or a second NIC) is very highly recommended.
a second NIC is generally more scalable (more nodes and bigger
configurations) but is still IP-based and isn't going to help you if
someone misconfigures a firewall...
What is the best way of protecting a 2 node cluster apart form not
having one? I tested mine very well but it would be very bad if both
decided to be DC (due to losing all switches for instance) and started
all domUs on them...
if you enable stonith this can't happen.
but the cluster can get into the described stonith fight and cause far
more outage than necessary.
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
