On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Dimitri Maziuk <dmaz...@bmrb.wisc.edu> wrote: > On Wednesday 11 August 2010 15:12, Igor Chudov wrote: > ... >> At this point, I am beginning to have my doubts about this whole >> heartbeat system and its ability to serve for years, in what looks to >> me like simple configuration. > ... > > Well, that's kinda why I stick to 2.1.4 (also b/c it's a stock rpm on centos) > and v1-style config. From back when things were simple stupid.
Simple stupid is exactly what I want. > As I understand it, most heartbeat work since was done on v2 features: xml, > resource monitoring, corosync, pacemaker... which I'm either not missing (mon > works just fine for monitoring) or actively don't want (xml in particular). I would not mind xml if either 1) it was documented or 2) the command line tool was documented beyond just mentioning every field or 3) the GUI was working instead of not working. > When I need a 3-node cluster I'll think about those. Until then, 2.1.4 is not > perfect but it works well enough. My heartbeat is 3.0.3. Do you think that, say, 2.1.4 s sufficiently bug free that I could install it from source and just let it run forever? I mean, I just want to get that simple two node cluster to run. I am not trying to back up Mars to Venus and Uranus by TCP over light rays. is 2.1.4 is easy and works, I will just install it. I assume that it can work with standard Ubuntu Lucid drbd. i _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
