[Lustre-discuss] failover software - heartbeat

[Cliff White]

Lundgren, Andrew wrote:
> It is very difficult to find relevant documentation for heartbeat 1/2. I just finished configuring a heartbeat system and would not recommend it because of the documentation.  (They seem to have removed portions the heartbeat documentation from the site.)  
> 
> Pacemaker is not a simple solution to configure either. I played briefly with the RH clustering software.  It does not directly support any FS type other than the basic ext2/ext3, and wasn't happy with a lustre type.  
> 

That might be simple to fix, if it is script-based. We submitted a patch 
aeons ago to the heartbeat guys to add 'ldiskfs' as a supported FS. As I 
recall, it was a one-line change.
cliffw

> --
> Andrew
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: lustre-discuss-bounces at lists.lustre.org [mailto:lustre-discuss-
>> bounces at lists.lustre.org] On Behalf Of Carlos Santana
>> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 11:42 AM
>> To: lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
>> Subject: [Lustre-discuss] failover software - heartbeat
>>
>> Howdy,
>>
>> The lustre manual recommends heartbeat for handling failover. The
>> pacemaker is successor of hearbeat version 2. So whats recommended -
>> should we be using pacemaker or stick to hearbeat?
>>
>> -
>> CS.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lustre-discuss mailing list
>> Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
>> http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> Lustre-discuss mailing list
> Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
> http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss