Re: [ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: Antw: Running two independent clusters

2017-03-22 Thread Nikhil Utane 
I need 2 clusters to be running independently of each other on same node.

-Nikhil

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 6:36 PM, Ulrich Windl <
ulrich.wi...@rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote:

> >>> Nikhil Utane  schrieb am 22.03.2017 um
> 11:23 in
> Nachricht
> :
> > Hi Ulrich,
> >
> > It's not an option unfortunately.
> > Our product runs on a specialized hardware and provides both the services
> > (A & B) that I am referring to. Hence I cannot have service A running on
> > some nodes as cluster A and service B running on other nodes as cluster
> B.
> > The two services HAVE to run on same node. The catch being service A and
> > service B have to be independent of each other.
> >
> > Hence looking at Container option since we are using that for some other
> > product (but not for Pacemaker/Corosync).
>
> But why do you need two pacemakers then?
>
> >
> > -Regards
> > Nikhil
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Ulrich Windl <
> > ulrich.wi...@rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote:
> >
> >> >>> Nikhil Utane  schrieb am 22.03.2017 um
> >> 07:48 in
> >> Nachricht
> >> :
> >> > Hi All,
> >> >
> >> > First of all, let me thank everyone here for providing excellent
> support
> >> > from the time I started evaluating this tool about a year ago. It has
> >> > helped me to make a timely and good quality release of our Redundancy
> >> > solution using Pacemaker & Corosync. (Three cheers :))
> >> >
> >> > Now for our next release we have a slightly different ask.
> >> > We want to provide Redundancy to two different types of services (we
> can
> >> > call them Service A and Service B) such that all cluster communication
> >> for
> >> > Service A happens on one network/interface (say VLAN A) and for
> service B
> >> > happens on a different network/interface (say VLAN B). Moreover we do
> not
> >> > want the details of Service A (resource attributes etc) to be seen by
> >> > Service B and vice-versa.
> >> >
> >> > So essentially we want to be able to run two independent clusters.
> From
> >> > what I gathered, we cannot run multiple instances of Pacemaker and
> >> Corosync
> >> > on same node. I was thinking if we can use Containers and run two
> >> isolated
> >>
> >> You conclude from two services that should not see each other that you
> >> need to instances of pacemaker on one node. Why?
> >> If you want true separation, drop the VLANs, make real networks and two
> >> independent clusters.
> >> Even if two pacemeaker on one node would work, you habe the problem of
> >> fencing, where at least one pacemaker instance will always be surprised
> >> badly if fencing takes place. I cannot imaging you want that!
> >>
> >> > instances of Pacemaker + Corosync on same node.
> >> > As per https://github.com/davidvossel/pacemaker_docker it looks
> do-able.
> >> > I wanted to get an opinion on this forum before I can commit that it
> can
> >> be
> >> > done.
> >>
> >> Why are you designing it more complicated as necessary?
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Please share your views if you have already done this and if there are
> >> any
> >> > known challenges that I should be familiar with.
> >> >
> >> > -Thanks
> >> > Nikhil
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
> >> http://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> >>
> >> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> >> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/
> doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> >> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
> >>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
> http://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
>
___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

[ClusterLabs] Antw: Re: Antw: Running two independent clusters

2017-03-22 Thread Ulrich Windl 
>>> Nikhil Utane  schrieb am 22.03.2017 um 11:23 in
Nachricht
:
> Hi Ulrich,
> 
> It's not an option unfortunately.
> Our product runs on a specialized hardware and provides both the services
> (A & B) that I am referring to. Hence I cannot have service A running on
> some nodes as cluster A and service B running on other nodes as cluster B.
> The two services HAVE to run on same node. The catch being service A and
> service B have to be independent of each other.
> 
> Hence looking at Container option since we are using that for some other
> product (but not for Pacemaker/Corosync).

But why do you need two pacemakers then?

> 
> -Regards
> Nikhil
> 
> 
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Ulrich Windl <
> ulrich.wi...@rz.uni-regensburg.de> wrote:
> 
>> >>> Nikhil Utane  schrieb am 22.03.2017 um
>> 07:48 in
>> Nachricht
>> :
>> > Hi All,
>> >
>> > First of all, let me thank everyone here for providing excellent support
>> > from the time I started evaluating this tool about a year ago. It has
>> > helped me to make a timely and good quality release of our Redundancy
>> > solution using Pacemaker & Corosync. (Three cheers :))
>> >
>> > Now for our next release we have a slightly different ask.
>> > We want to provide Redundancy to two different types of services (we can
>> > call them Service A and Service B) such that all cluster communication
>> for
>> > Service A happens on one network/interface (say VLAN A) and for service B
>> > happens on a different network/interface (say VLAN B). Moreover we do not
>> > want the details of Service A (resource attributes etc) to be seen by
>> > Service B and vice-versa.
>> >
>> > So essentially we want to be able to run two independent clusters. From
>> > what I gathered, we cannot run multiple instances of Pacemaker and
>> Corosync
>> > on same node. I was thinking if we can use Containers and run two
>> isolated
>>
>> You conclude from two services that should not see each other that you
>> need to instances of pacemaker on one node. Why?
>> If you want true separation, drop the VLANs, make real networks and two
>> independent clusters.
>> Even if two pacemeaker on one node would work, you habe the problem of
>> fencing, where at least one pacemaker instance will always be surprised
>> badly if fencing takes place. I cannot imaging you want that!
>>
>> > instances of Pacemaker + Corosync on same node.
>> > As per https://github.com/davidvossel/pacemaker_docker it looks do-able.
>> > I wanted to get an opinion on this forum before I can commit that it can
>> be
>> > done.
>>
>> Why are you designing it more complicated as necessary?
>>
>> >
>> > Please share your views if you have already done this and if there are
>> any
>> > known challenges that I should be familiar with.
>> >
>> > -Thanks
>> > Nikhil
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org 
>> http://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users 
>>
>> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org 
>> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf 
>> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org 
>>





___
Users mailing list: Users@clusterlabs.org
http://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org