[Pacemaker] Pacemaker cluster with different operating systems

Osman Findik Osman.Findik at telenity.com
Thu Mar 7 10:03:04 EST 2013

Thanks for the explanations Lars,
Any documentation on boothd usage with pacemaker on 1:1 fail-over scenario, and/or external/sbd usage with pacemaker will help us a lot.


-----Original Message-----
From: Lars Marowsky-Bree [mailto:lmb at suse.com] 
Sent: 07 Mart 2013 Perşembe 16:40
To: The Pacemaker cluster resource manager
Subject: Re: [Pacemaker] Pacemaker cluster with different operating systems

On 2013-03-07T09:22:27, Osman Findik <Osman.Findik at telenity.com> wrote:

> Hi Lars,
> We think that the third node will be in standby, so only corosync and pacemaker processes will execute and no resource will be executed on this node by the cluster.

That is true, but it will still participate in the corosync protocol (meaning an instability of the quorum node could translate to instability of your cluster); and if you really run pacemaker there, you'll have to keep it updated as well so that it doesn't become the eternal DC.

A third node makes perfect sense if you need a third node in your cluster for redundancy and load reasons. It's not good to add one at this layer if all you need is better quorum.

> For other approaches, I only know boothd. And what I know is it is suitable for geo-redundancy purposes. I will look for fence_sanlock.

boothd can also be used as a 1:1 fail-over scenario. Admittedly, it's overkill and makes the configuration more complex. I'd probably go with external/sbd, but then, I wrote that ;-)


Architect Storage/HA
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) "Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde

Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker at oss.clusterlabs.org

Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org

More information about the Pacemaker mailing list