[ClusterLabs] design question to DRBD

Lentes, Bernd bernd.lentes at helmholtz-muenchen.de
Thu Jun 23 05:57:47 EDT 2016

----- On Jun 22, 2016, at 11:48 PM, Dimitri Maziuk dmaziuk at bmrb.wisc.edu wrote:

> On 06/22/2016 04:29 PM, Klaus Wenninger wrote:
>> On 06/22/2016 11:17 PM, Lentes, Bernd wrote:
>>> I'm thinking about active/active. But i think active/passive with a
>>> non-cluster fs is less complicated.
>> But you will need something to control DRBD - especially in the
>> active/passive-case.
>> And the services/IPs would probably have to be pulled to the active side.
> It looks like with modern linux kernels you don't have to
> re-bind()/listen() anymore when an IP address is added. So you can start
> services bound to '*' from init and have pacemaker only manage the
> shared ip address.
> But yes, with active/passive DRBD you need something to control DRBD and
> mount DRBD FS and then start services that depend on DRBD FS.
> Active-active should let you have your filesystem mounted on both nodes
> at once and have things running from init. I never tried it myself so I
> don't know which of them would be "less complicated".
> --

What i mean with "less complicated" is that i prefer to have everything
managed by pacemaker and not some stuff by pacemaker and some stuff by init.
This is more overseeable.


Helmholtz Zentrum Muenchen
Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer Gesundheit und Umwelt (GmbH)
Ingolstaedter Landstr. 1
85764 Neuherberg
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzende: MinDir'in Baerbel Brumme-Bothe
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Prof. Dr. Guenther Wess, Dr. Alfons Enhsen, Renate Schlusen (komm.)
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 6466
USt-IdNr: DE 129521671

More information about the Users mailing list