If you search the forum you will find a step guide for using a rpi as third node.
On September 28, 2016 5:53:05 PM GMT+02:00, Andreas Steinel <a.stei...@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi Thomas, > >Thank you for your time and your answer. > >I wonder why e.g. an Oracle Real Application Cluster (RAC) works so >well with a 2 node in a HA setup. We deployed 50+ clusters in the last >years and never had a split-brain-like situation. Rolling-updates, as >well as occasional host crashes are also possible without loosing data >- sometimes even sessions. If you use Transparent Failover (TAF), your >database sessions will be migrated to the other node, rolled back and >restarted (of course application support required on the "client" >side). It's not perfect, but most of the time. We had only a few total >crashes, but mainly due to storage issues, but also due to some bugs >in the cluster stack. > >Nevertheless, it's very good to see that a simple third vote solution >is on the horizon, which could be easily integrated in a RPi or an >even less "powerhungry" machine. > >Best, >Andreas > >On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Thomas Lamprecht ><t.lampre...@proxmox.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> QDisks are not ideal and those itself will probably not supported by >Proxmox >> VE, also I would really love top see the term "two node HA" vanish, >as its >> only marketing talk and is technically simply not possible (sadly >basic >> rules of our universe make it impossible), they call a setup with >three >> voters (the two nodes + the storage node) two node HA to sound >better... >> >> That said, rant aside, there are plans to add the corosync (our >cluster >> communication stack) QDevice daemon which allows then qdevices (at >the >> moment there is only QNetd) to provide votes for one or more cluster. >> >> This QNetd device may run on a non Proxmox VE node and uses TCP/IP to >> communicate with the cluster. >> >> So you can have a two node cluster, setup the qdevice daemon there >and the >> qnetd daemon on your storage box which then provides the third vote >needed >> to allow recovery on a failure of one of the two Proxmox VE nodes. >> >> Patches for this are already on the list, whats mainly missing is - >> obviously - reviewing them and documentation of this all (which I'm >doing >> atm). >> >> cheers, >> Thomas >> >> >> >> On 09/28/2016 03:26 PM, Andreas Steinel wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'd like to ask if there are any plans to use e.g. the shared >storage >>> as a quorum/voting disk like the oracle grid infrastructure uses it >to >>> get a two node ha cluster (for almost a decade). This obviously only >>> works for NAS or SAN storage. >>> >>> Best, >>> Andreas >>> _______________________________________________ >>> pve-devel mailing list >>> pve-devel@pve.proxmox.com >>> http://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> pve-devel mailing list >> pve-devel@pve.proxmox.com >> http://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel >_______________________________________________ >pve-devel mailing list >pve-devel@pve.proxmox.com >http://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. ---- This mail was virus scanned and spam checked before delivery. This mail is also DKIM signed. See header dkim-signature. _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@pve.proxmox.com http://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel