[Lustre-discuss] Confusion with failover

[Dhruv]

I think Linux HA or something equivalent is mandatory. The manual of
1.6 says so. And as 1.4.5.1 being old, its manual is not available.

Klaus Steden wrote:
> On 6/26/08 9:16 PM, "Dhruv" <DhruvDesaai at gmail.com>did etch on stone
> tablets:
>
> > Actually with my kernel of 2.6.9-22,  lustre 1.4.5.1 fits. And i am
> > not in position to change the OS itself.
> >
> > I tried with the failover of OSTs without Linux HA. It worked fairly.
> > I am now testing the same rigoursly to see whether i am correct. But
> > the failover of MDS without HA didnt worked atall.
> >
> > Can it without HA?
> >
> No. As Brian pointed out, Lustre supports failover at the server level, but
> detection, fencing, etc. has to be handled by another process external to
> Lustre. Most people use Linux-HA, including myself, and I find it to be
> robust and fairly straightforward to implement. However, because you're
> using 1.4, you might have to resort to some "script-fu" to get the
> remounting operation to work properly.
>
> Here is a paste of my /etc/ha.d/haresources file, which for Lustre 1.6 can
> be used with the Linux 'mount' command, meaning I can treat my Lustre MDT as
> a regular disk, which HA supports very well. If you use lconf, you'll have
> to make some sort of script-based call-out to have the secondary MDS start
> when it detects failure on the primary.
>
> -- cut --
> [root at mds-0-0 ~]# cat /etc/ha.d/haresources
> mds-0-0.local 172.16.2.252
> Filesystem::-Llustre-MDT0000::/mnt/lustremdt::lustre
> -- cut --
>
> (that's supposed to be all one line ... stupid mail client)
>
> cheers,
> Klaus
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lustre-discuss mailing list
> Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
> http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss