[ClusterLabs] 2-Node Cluster Pointless?

[Ian]

>  maybe I need another coffee?

No, I don't understand how it's relevant to the specific topic of avoiding
split-brains, either.  I suppose it's possible that I also need coffee.

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 1:45 PM, Dimitri Maziuk <dmaziuk at bmrb.wisc.edu>
wrote:

> On 04/17/2017 11:58 AM, Digimer wrote:
>
> > ... Unless I am misunderstanding, your comment is related to
> > serviceability of clusters in general. I'm failing to link the contexts.
> > Similarly, I'm not sure how this relates to "new" vs. "best"...
>
> You can't know if *a* customer can access the service it provides. You
> can know if the service access point is up and connected to the server
> process.
>
> Take a simple example of shared-nothing read-only cluster: all you need
> to know is that the daemon is bound to '*' and the floating ip is bound
> to eth0.
>
> This is the "best" in that it's simple, stupid, does all you you
> need/can do and nothing that doesn't make your cluster run any "better".
>  It's also very unexciting.
>
> --
> Dimitri Maziuk
> Programmer/sysadmin
> BioMagResBank, UW-Madison -- http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list: Users at clusterlabs.org
> http://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> Bugs: http://bugs.clusterlabs.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20170417/db181025/attachment.html>