On 2008-09-04T09:06:11, Paul Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think there's been a certain amount of confusion with regards to Heartbeat > and Pacemaker (and their versions), so I > wonder if those involved (Lars, Andrew, Alan?) would clarify the following > assumptions: > > Pacemaker 0.6.x can be used as a replacement for the CRM in heartbeat 2.1.3 > (but NOT 2.1.4)?
No, not with 2.1.3 "plain"; Andrew had a repackaged version of hb-2.1.3 which works with Pacemaker. > In future, both Heartbeat AND Pacemaker will be required to provide > the functional equivalent (broadly speaking) of 2.1.3 with its CRM, as > Heartbeat itself won't have a CRM? Exactly. 2.99.x is a preview of a 3.0 release of heartbeat which has Pacemaker/crm removed, and thus doesn't overlap with Pacemaker, and thus can be installed along with pacemaker directly. > Pacemaker's NOT a fork or replacement for Heartbeat. Exactly. Pacemaker is a split of code from heartbeat. > If I understand correctly, Pacemaker is so named because it's required > for Heartbeat to work in much the same as a pacemaker is required to > maintain a stable heart rhythm? Well, heartbeat doesn't require pacemaker. Pacemaker doesn't require heartbeat (it can also run on openAIS). But yes, they can cooperate. > I think it might be worth highlighting the incompatibility between > Pacemaker and 2.1.4 (and *why*) on the Wiki page > http://www.clusterlabs.org/mw/Install I've since given up trying to explain it; every possible explanation has been misinterpreted by some ;-) Regards, Lars -- Teamlead Kernel, SuSE Labs, Research and Development SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) "Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
