[Pacemaker] CTDB + Samba + GFS2 or OCFS2

Justin Shafer justinshafer at gmail.com
Thu Jul 1 11:54:24 EDT 2010

Hello Everyone!


I have been spending the past 2 months messing with clusters. I built an
active\passive 2 years ago with samba and wanted to see how CTDB has been


Long story short, I cannot pass the ping_pong test after following the
clusters from scratch guide for fedora 13. I can get ping_pong to work in
SLES11 under ocfs2.. but only once.  Don't know what I did to make it work
for both nodes, but it quit. I have tried GFS2 for Ubuntu 10.04 and Fedora


I can get a node to mount has jid=1 but not both nodes. Feeling frustrated.
I have the latest packages, etc. 


Worse my goal was to have an active\active samba cluster with the clients
not noticing a node failure but I read that wont be possible until SMB2. So
now I am wondering what to do.


Maybe I should go for a virtual machine that is clustered instead of samba?
I could throw on XP and use Sybase\Mysql\MSSQL without any major hassles I
suppose and would be more beneficial then using Samba and CTDB?


Still annoys me that I cant pass the ping pong test. I am going to format
and try again. I gave my client a quote for steel-eye and Failover Server
and I think it was too expensive. 


-Justin Shafer

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/pacemaker/attachments/20100701/5a4d48ce/attachment.html>

More information about the Pacemaker mailing list