On 23/04/2013, at 6:05 PM, T. wrote:
> Hi Devin,
>
> thank you very much for your answer.
>
>> If you insist on trying to do this with just the Linux-HA cluster,
>> I don't have any suggestions as to how you should proceed.
> I know that the "construct" we are building is quite complicated.
>
Hi Devin,
thank you very much for your answer.
> If you insist on trying to do this with just the Linux-HA cluster,
> I don't have any suggestions as to how you should proceed.
I know that the "construct" we are building is quite complicated.
The problem is, that the active network (10.20.10.x)
David Coulson wrote:
> Your configuration seems to have way too many moving parts and since you are
> making routing changes when the nodes become primary it is difficult to
> ensure that it will actually work based upon the monitoring you are doing
> when it is passive.
>
> Not 100% sure wha
Hi David,
> Why can't both your cluster nodes have 10.20.10.1 as their default
> route all the time?
because the different locations have different networks, routers,
IP-addresses etc. But to be always reachable from the outside, they need
one common IP-address, that is valid on the active node.
On 4/19/13 5:48 AM, T. wrote:
When a server gets active, it will get the cluster-ip "10.20.10.70" and
the default route to "10.20.10.1".
Why can't both your cluster nodes have 10.20.10.1 as their default route
all the time?
Your configuration seems to have way too many moving parts and since
Hi,
> Because the nodes are located in different networks, each node needs
> it's own route-ressource, that is only valid if the node is passive and
> will be removed when this node goes active and gets the default route
> for the cluster-ip.
I did not found any solution for this, so I'm going "th
Hi David,
thank you very much for your answer.
> Are they really on different networks? What is the net mask?
Yes I'm "quite" sure, they are connectect via different switches to
different carriers to different networks. It is the preparation for
location redundancy.
> ClusterIP won't work unless
On Apr 15, 2013, at 1:59 PM, "T." wrote:
>
>
> For the access-network I use a different NIC, the nodes are in different
> networks, NodeA has 10.20.11.70, NodeB has 10.20.12.70 and I have
> configured a cluster-ip, the active node gets, (10.20.10.70).
Are they really on different networks? Wh
Hi everybody,
I have a CentOS 6.4-Cluster with corosync 1.4.1, pacemaker 1.1.8 and
crmsh 1.2.5. The crmsh I reinstalled from a different repo, because I
don't like pcs very much - no idea why it was removed in the pacemaker
1.1.8-build for RHEL/CentOS :-(
The setup is not that difficult, anyway
