On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 00:23, Todd, Conor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi list! > > I haven't seen anyone talk about the energy-efficiency of high-availability > clusters, so I let me bring up my thoughts on it and see if we find this to > be a subject of interest. > > Linux has decent power management via APM and ACPI. Therefore, each > Heartbeat node can be expected to manage its power usage efficiently, given > the service load the the administrator (including the CRM) has decided to run > on the node. What is lacking here is a power management scheme that looks at > load on the cluster overall, and, in the event of a power loss, consolidates > resources onto as few nodes as possible so that nodes can be throttled back > or even powered-down to conserve energy (in this case, generator fuel and > battery life). > > I happen to work from Houston, TX, where we just got hit with a fairly large > hurricane. Our labs were shut down before the event happened because we > expected a complete loss of mains power. I was playing with the idea of > leaving my team's services cluster running (it's running HB 2.1.4), but > decided against it because I know of no way to have the CRM consolidate > services and shut down un-used nodes.
You could manually set nodes into standby mode - that would at least let the machine be mostly idle. But right now, we're simply not smart enough to handle this and have no way to power the nodes up again when we need them. > Does anyone else think that this would be useful? Yep. > > What I envision is a reduction in cluster size after having been in a > power-threatened state for a certain amount of time. This would be different > from fencing, in that the quorum size would change once the nodes to be shut > down have been verified as offline. This would allow the cluster to continue > operating with the redundancy and quorum logic as expected, but it would > simply be a smaller cluster. Its a neat idea - not sure when we'd be able to implement it though. It would be a reasonable invasive change I think. > > When power is restored and after a certain amount of time (or perhaps batter > condition) has passed, the nodes which were brought down in order to conserve > power would be brought back online. > > Yes/no/that's silly? > > - Conor > _______________________________________________ > Linux-HA mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems > _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
