Re: [ClusterLabs] Maximum number of nodes support in single cluster
On Fri, 2019-11-22 at 07:32 +, S Sathish S wrote: > Hi Team, > > In Clusterlab below pacemaker and corosync version what is maximum > cluster nodes its supported ? will it support for 120 nodes in single > cluster? > > corosync-2.4.4 à https://github.com/corosync/corosync/tree/v2.4.4 > pacemaker-2.0.2 à > https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pacemaker/tree/Pacemaker-2.0.2 > > if we have 120 nodes in single cluster let us know if any impact or > consideration need to take for any cluster configuration parameter , > please suggest. > > let us know if any recommendation of cluster nodes limit pre-defined. > > Thanks and Regards, > S Sathish At this time, nowhere near 120 full cluster nodes are supported. There's no official limit by the upstream projects, because so much depends on hardware and applications, but commercial entities often limit support to 16 or 32 nodes. Going above 16 will likely require high-end hardware and careful tuning of corosync parameters. However pacemaker does support lightweight nodes via Pacemaker Remote: https://clusterlabs.org/pacemaker/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/2.0/html-single/Pacemaker_Remote/ The scalability of Pacemaker Remote isn't well known. Some users have reported problems with as few as 40 remote nodes, while others have gotten above 100 without problems. -- Ken Gaillot ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
[ClusterLabs] Maximum number of nodes support in single cluster
Hi Team, In Clusterlab below pacemaker and corosync version what is maximum cluster nodes its supported ? will it support for 120 nodes in single cluster? corosync-2.4.4 --> https://github.com/corosync/corosync/tree/v2.4.4 pacemaker-2.0.2 --> https://github.com/ClusterLabs/pacemaker/tree/Pacemaker-2.0.2 if we have 120 nodes in single cluster let us know if any impact or consideration need to take for any cluster configuration parameter , please suggest. let us know if any recommendation of cluster nodes limit pre-defined. Thanks and Regards, S Sathish ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
Re: [ClusterLabs] corosync 3.0.1 on Debian/Buster reports some MTU errors
Jean-Francois Malouin writes: > * christine caulfield [20191121 03:19]: > >> On 18/11/2019 21:31, Jean-Francois Malouin wrote: >> >>> However the system log on the nodes reports those much more frequently, a >>> few >>> times a day: >>> >>> Nov 17 23:26:20 node1 corosync[2258]: [KNET ] link: host: 2 link: 1 is >>> down >>> Nov 17 23:26:20 node1 corosync[2258]: [KNET ] host: host: 2 (passive) >>> best link: 0 (pri: 0) >>> Nov 17 23:26:26 node1 corosync[2258]: [KNET ] rx: host: 2 link: 1 is up >>> Nov 17 23:26:26 node1 corosync[2258]: [KNET ] host: host: 2 (passive) >>> best link: 1 (pri: 1) >> >> Those don't look good. having a link down for 6 seconds looks like a >> serious network outage that needs looking into, especially if they >> are that frequent, or it could be a bug. You don't say which version >> of libknet you have installed but make sure it's the latest one. > > libknet1 is 1.8-2 and is the latest one from Debian buster distro. If no other solution emerges, try installing libknet1_1.13-1 from bullseye (all of its dependencies are satisfied in buster). There are important fixes in that version, but I can't tell whether those are relevant in your case. If this proves successful, though, that will provide me with some ammunition for pushing for a stable update. -- Feri ___ Manage your subscription: https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/
