On 2013-05-24T12:15:04, Digimer <li...@alteeve.ca> wrote: > Nope. Until RHEL 5, openais was the communication layer of the cluster. > However, the full AIS API was deemed "overkill" for what HA clustering > needed, so corosync was created for RHEL 6 as a stripped-down, HA focused > version of openais. In turn, openais was made a corosync plugin for those > who actually want the full AIS API.
You know, there *is* a software community out there that doesn't use RHEL. Really. ;-) At the time, this was actually a community decision and not RHEL-driven. (Though of course the needs of RHEL also informed it.) The AIS APIs were mostly just not deemed worth the trouble. Outside a very narrow field (Carrier Grade), very few people used them, and those that did preferred the opensaf implementation. Hence, openais turned out to not be worth the effort of long-term support for a rather complex set of services and a *huge* specification. OCFS2 and cLVM2 exist in an incarnation that uses the AIS CKPT (checkpoint) service for synchronization, but that has been/will be rewritten too. > The concepts of "Active/Active", "Active/Passive", etc. is not a membership > or cluster communication layer question. Those concepts come from the > resource manager (rgmanager or pacemaker). Yes - and no, because it neglects the detail that the AIS stuff does include the notion of a limited cluster manager too. Regards, Lars -- Architect Storage/HA SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) "Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde _______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org