On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 15:42:08 -0500 (EST), Leo Pleiman wrote
> Check this out...
>
>
http://www.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/5/html/Configuration_Example_-_NFS_Over_GFS/index.html
>
> It provides nfs of the file system as a service to nodes outside the
cluster. NFS from one node
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 9:28 PM, Joseph L. Casale
wrote:
>>I don;t think anyone on the project recommends Heartbeat v1 anymore.
>>At least use the crm/pacemaker extensions (http://clusterlabs.org) if
>>you're thinking about using Heartbeat in any way.
>
> Hi,
> That's a coincidence, I am just part
Hi,
Given I have 2 Red Hat Clusters; 1 cluster consisting of physical
hosts and another consisting of virtual guests which are hosted in the
physical hosts. The physical host cluster uses DRAC fencing while the
virtual guest cluster uses virtual machine fencing.
If a physical host goes down, I sa
Greetings,
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 9:05 PM, Joseph L. Casale
wrote:
> how does it mitigate the
> handling of stale filehandles in nfs? It doesn't mention anything about
> moving the nfs dirs into the shared storage?
>
That's elementary, use udp than the default tcp for nfs share. ;)
Regards
Ra
>Check this out...
>
>http://www.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/5/html/Configuration_Example_-_NFS_Over_GFS/index.html
Great article, pretty much what I want to do with only two nodes though.
>It provides nfs of the file system as a service to nodes outside the cluster.
>NFS from
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 01:40:37PM -0800, Celso K. Webber wrote:
> I endorse Doug's opinion.
>
> Although my opinion is empiric, I can afirm that a crossover (can be a
> straight cable in case of GigEthernet) is "more stable" than many Ethernet
> switches out there. Not to mention that sometimes
I endorse Doug's opinion.
Although my opinion is empiric, I can afirm that a crossover (can be a straight
cable in case of GigEthernet) is "more stable" than many Ethernet switches out
there. Not to mention that sometimes the customer has only 100 Mbps ports,
while using crossover cable you'll
Check this out...
http://www.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/5/html/Configuration_Example_-_NFS_Over_GFS/index.html
It provides nfs of the file system as a service to nodes outside the cluster.
NFS from one node to the other is a real hack, you have nothing if the NFS
server dies
>I don;t think anyone on the project recommends Heartbeat v1 anymore.
>At least use the crm/pacemaker extensions (http://clusterlabs.org) if
>you're thinking about using Heartbeat in any way.
Hi,
That's a coincidence, I am just part way through your Fedora 11 doc using
a couple of CentOS boxes. I
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 9:30 PM, Joseph L. Casale
wrote:
> Hey,
> I am new to clusters, and have been reading up all the options but
> given I haven't any experience ever setting one up I don't know which
> option is best suited.
>
> I need to replicate a local volume between two servers, and expo
We did. It's problematic when you need to reboot a switch or it goes
down. They can't talk and try to fence each other. Crossover cable is
a direct connection, actually far more efficient for what you are trying
to accomplish.
On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 11:57 -0600, Paul M. Dyer wrote:
> Crossover
Crossover cable??
With all the $$ spent, try putting a switch between the nodes.
Paul
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Tucker"
To: linux-cluster@redhat.com
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 10:15:49 AM (GMT-0600) America/Chicago
Subject: [Linux-cluster] Repeated fencing
We have a 2 4
Hello,
I have a 3 Xen nodes cluster + GFS2 (SAN). All VM are in the GFS2 FS.
OS: just updated to RH 5.4
During the Dom0 update of one of the nodes I used live migration to move VMs to
another node. After the update, I rebooted the server. When it came back VMs
tried to go back to his preferred
We have a 2 4.x cluster that has developed an issue we are unable to
resolve. Starting back in December, the nodes began fencing each other
randomly, and as frequently as once a day. There is nothing at the
console prior to it happening, and nothing in the logs. We have not
been able to develop
>psst.. wanna try this?
>
>sources.redhat.com/cluster/doc/nfscookbook.pdf
>
>and oh, DRBD in primary/primary mode works if you don't have (budget
>for) external shared storage.
Hi,
I did find that doc while looking and gave it a read. Not knowing
anything about how the suite operates, how does it
>For a simple HA with active/passive i would do it with just a cron script to
>check `drbdadm role ` and bring up the IP and services on the Primary if
>the other node is Secondary or Unknown (if not yet). I would still use some
>kind of fencing in DRBD's outdate-peer handler (at least set down the
Greetings,
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 2:00 AM, Joseph L. Casale
wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> I need to replicate a local volume between two servers, and export the
> data via nfs and rsyncd from either. They only need to be active/passive.
>
psst.. wanna try this?
sources.redhat.com/cluster/doc/nfscookbook
Hi,
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 20:30:38 +, Joseph L. Casale wrote
> Hey,
> I am new to clusters, and have been reading up all the options but
> given I haven't any experience ever setting one up I don't know which
> option is best suited.
>
> I need to replicate a local volume between two servers, a
18 matches
Mail list logo
