-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Running 4.1 on linux(32) and solaris(sparc).
Thanks
Peter
Peter DrakeUnderkoffler
Xinupro, LLC
617-834-2352
Eric Hennessey wrote:
> Odd that hastatus wasn't implemented in the sim as hasim -status. I'll
> look into this.
>
> Regarding the "almos
Odd that hastatus wasn't implemented in the sim as hasim -status. I'll
look into this.
Regarding the "almost instantaneous actions" in the sim...what version
are you running? The latest versions of the sim have introduced an
artificial delay between resources on/offlining.
Eric
-Original
The VCS simulator...learn it, live it, love it.
:-)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim
SenickaSent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 11:13 AMTo:
Steven SimCc: veritas-ha@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject:
Re: [Veritas-ha] SG interaction question
comments below
I think this is a limitation in the Sim.
Let me do a little digging
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter
DrakeUnderkoffler
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 11:46 AM
To: veritas-ha@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-ha] VCS simulat
I/O fencing handles corner cases.
- Hung node returning after being excluded from cluster
- Network interconnects severed
I/O fencing provides 2 basic functions
- enhanced membership arbitration to determine who is in the cluster
- SCSI-III disk reservations to block access to disk, just in case
a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Does anyone know if there is a way to have what hastatus does within the
simulator?
Normally, hastatus on a real cluster with no options is in an always update
form like a "tail -f". The hasim command for status does not allow for this
unless I am mi
EMC = 170 odd Gig disks.
Coordinator needs 3 10mb LUNS.
I waste more space than that on storing bad jokes from email..
I/O fencing is best possible config to prevent split brain.
Low Priority is a best practice, but is still not bulletproof.
-Original Message-
From: Steven Sim [mai
Hello Gurus;
Firstly, I wish to thank James Senicka of Symantec for his wonderfully
fast and very technically accurate replies.
I wish all other product vendors were so efficient.
Support like this is one reason why I will continue to push VCS as a
clustering solution.
I am currently trying t
comments below
From: Steven Sim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 10:45 AMTo: Jim
SenickaCc: veritas-ha@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: Re:
[Veritas-ha] SG interaction question
Jim;What if the situation is such;
Two SG, each with it's own Oracle instance.
F
Jim;
What if the situation is such;
Two SG, each with it's own Oracle instance.
First SG (Production SG) running on Node 1 and 2nd SG (Test SG)
running on Node 2.
First SG requires a failover on any critical resource fault. It
cannot run on the same system as the 2nd SG.
2
SG with only one system in the system list, and establish
an offline local group dependency from the other group to this
one
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Evsyukov,
SergeySent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 5:41 AMTo:
veritas-ha@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject
Hello,
We have 2 Oracle DB.
One of them is under VCS control and can switchovers between 2 nodes. Second
must run only on one node if there are no first Oracle instance on it. What the
best practice to configure it? HAtriggers or SG with only one system in it,
controlled by link from seco
12 matches
Mail list logo
