Andrew Beekhof wrote: > >> the confusion - people tend to want to use the "latest/newest" version >> so perhaps see "v1" as inferior)? > > It _is_ inferior. > Its easier to configure because it doesn't do even half what v2 can. > Granted.
> V1 lets you define groups that run here or there... of course the > configuration can be mastered in a nanosecond. > Which makes it easier for a newcomer to get to grips with. Before I started using heartbeat a couple of years ago, setting up to machines in a cluster appeared to be something of a black art. Though I (hopefully) understood the principles, reading the documentation on Sun Cluster was the equivalent of listening to Vogon poetry! Fortunately I found linux-ha.org and in no time was able to configure two Sun X4200s running SLES9 as a working cluster, using the v1 configuration. > Its not _that_ hard. 90% of it is cut&paste and changing a few values. > You'd think we were requiring people to learn Latin or something. > Perhaps it's just me. Visually, the XML looks so much more daunting than ha.cf + haresources . I know the GUI's not to everyone's taste, and it's reputed to have a tendency to do unpleasant things to the config (fortunately I've not experienced such behaviour) but it at least helped me get a v2 configuration off the ground. I am, however, examining the use of the CLI more. > But we've been making the XML easier to read anyway and Dejan has just > completed an awesome CLI tool (totally devoid of XML) for 1.0 that makes > configuring the cluster a walk in the park. > Welcome news! :) Don't get me wrong. I'm a great fan of Heartbeat and am keep to see it develop and make further use of it. I now have 3 clusters up and running with 2.1.3 and DRBD and if I could get it working on Solaris (SPARC) with Oracle and our EMC SAN, I'd have more! :) -- Paul Walsh _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
