1.7.2011 16:43, Helmut Wollmersdorfer kirjoitti:
Am 24.06.2011 um 16:58 schrieb Whit Blauvelt:
I truly appreciate that, Pete. What I've been hoping to find is
distribution-neutral models for handling KVM failover, where each KVM
VM is
directly on top of a dedicated DRBD resource - which is a
Am 24.06.2011 um 16:58 schrieb Whit Blauvelt:
I truly appreciate that, Pete. What I've been hoping to find is
distribution-neutral models for handling KVM failover, where each
KVM VM is
directly on top of a dedicated DRBD resource - which is a setup with
an
ideal granularity, as compared to
On 24/06/11 16:45, Noah Mehl wrote:
I've done a lot of thinking on this point, but I've come to a
different conclusion. I think that a drbd resource per guest HD is
not a great way to go. I think that adds a lot of complexity and
overhead you don't necessarily need.
I prefer this route mysel
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 10:58:28AM -0400, Whit Blauvelt wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 01:54:45PM -0600, Pete Ashdown wrote:
>
> > I don't think the cluster software is quite ready for primetime in Ubuntu.
> > I have high hopes for the next LTS (12.04?). In any case, you'll need the
> > ubuntu
On Jun 24, 2011, at 10:58 AM, Whit Blauvelt wrote:
> But of course I'm looking to live replacement of guests. It's easy enough to
> do that with a human involved sitting at virt-manager or drbd-mc. Anything a
> human can do, that's a simple, consistent operation like that can be handled
> by a wel
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 01:54:45PM -0600, Pete Ashdown wrote:
> I don't think the cluster software is quite ready for primetime in Ubuntu.
> I have high hopes for the next LTS (12.04?). In any case, you'll need the
> ubuntu-ha ppa now.
I'm an old-school sysadmin. It's gotten to a point in the l
Thinking on this more, I'm no longer certain that host-level stonith is an
appropriate first or second level of response. There is no such thing in
this scenario as a DRBD resource which isn't solely devoted to a single KVM
VM. So any logic that assures that only the appropriate VMs are started on
On 06/23/2011 11:33 AM, Whit Blauvelt wrote:
> So, short of taking the long way around and spending weeks more studying the
> whole Pacemaker/OpenAIS universe, what's the simplest way to a reasonably
> dependable two-host KVM-VM-on-LVM-on-DRBD private cloud?
I don't think the cluster software is q
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 01:33:05PM -0400, Whit Blauvelt wrote:
> The step for today is trying to get IPMI stonith working, using Pacemaker
> 1.0.9 and Heartbeat 3.0.2. I've tried configuring external/impi through
> DRBD-MC, but all ends up with is a gray box saying Starting ... Not Running,
> desp
Hi,
After various diversions from the project, I'm back to gathering clues on
what should be a simple setup. But either my clue basket it leaking, or some
necessary clues take better luck than mine to easily find. It's should be a
fairly simple setup to complete.
It consists of two servers, dedic
10 matches
Mail list logo
