Hi,
I’ve used PF in a clustered environment previously (version 5) and had more
downtime because of it than I did without. This wasn’t directly an issue with
PacketFence, but with the way that DRDB ties in with the Linux kernel, and how
to maintain an up to date kernel whilst running this technology.
Personally I’m hoping that the upcoming version 7 clustering will resolve my
worries around this, as currently we’re relying on VMWare to help to mitigate
the single point of failure that is currently our database server. It certainly
sounds very promising.
Cheers,
Andi
From: Tobias Friede [mailto:t.fri...@gmail.com]
Sent: 13 December 2016 14:41
To: packetfence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PacketFence-users] PacketFence v7 - Will clustering be easier?
2016-12-12 22:43 GMT+01:00 Tim DeNike
<tim.den...@mcc.edu<mailto:tim.den...@mcc.edu>>:
Umm.... As far as clusters go, packetfence is pretty damn easy.... IMHO..
Mhh, I tried many installations and followed the Cluster Guide.
I always stuck at the point, where the filesystem is created on the
DRBD-Cluster.
I just get I/O errors after mounting the partition.... Maybe the Documentation
is not up to date?
Greetings
Tobias
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Tobias Friede
<t.fri...@gmail.com<mailto:t.fri...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi,
nice announcement, thanks for your great work !
From: Ludovic Marcotte <lmarco...@inverse.ca<mailto:lmarco...@inverse.ca>>
>Database Clustering - PacketFence v7 will make use of MariaDB Galera Cluster.
>Each PacketFence server will hold a copy of the database and any >cluster
>member detaching itself from the clustered environment will still work and
>handle endpoint connections gracefully. It will automatically >resynchronize
>itself to the cluster when network connectivity is restored;
The big question is: will clustering be easier than in packetfence 6.x?
The complicated cluster integration is one of the biggest disadvantage of
packetfence, that's why we cluster Packetfence with VMware technologies and not
with build in features.
But VMware helps only in case of hardware and network issues and not in case of
software issues, so I would prefer an integrated cluster mechanism.
Greetings from Germany
Tobias
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
PacketFence-users mailing list
PacketFence-users@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:PacketFence-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
PacketFence-users mailing list
PacketFence-users@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:PacketFence-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users
________________________________
[Cardiff Metropolitan University - Queens Anniversary Prizes
2015]<http://www.cardiffmet.ac.uk/news/Pages/Cardiff-Met-research-recognised-in-Queens-Anniversary-Prizes-for-Higher-and-Further-Education.aspx>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
PacketFence-users mailing list
PacketFence-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users
