[ClusterLabs] Corosync rrp or bonding

[Adam Budziński]

Thank you very much.I really appreciate your help!

These are 2 virtual machines ESXi do you see any possible hardware
limitations ? (Don't know much about VMware).

czw., 14.03.2019, 17:13 użytkownik Jan Friesse <jfriesse at redhat.com>
napisał:

> Adam,
>
> > What is more recommended for providing corosync/pacemaker link
> redundancy?
> >
> >  >
> > a)    Configure two rings and rrp within corosync, if yes:
> >
> > -       can we use two separate VLANs connected to two separate physical
> > NIC for the heartbeat connections
>
> Yes
>
> >
> > -       do they have to be the same networks
>
> No, it actually must be different one
>
> >
> > -       which mode should I use for a two node cluster passive or active
>
> Passive. Active doesn't make progress till timeout when one link is
> disconnected
>
> >
> > b)    bonding – if yes, why ?
> >
>
> B is correct. RRP is just seriously broken - that is the reason why it
> was replaced in Corosync 3. When you have a bonding capable HW, use it.
>
> Regards,
>    Honza
>
> >
> >
> > Thank you !
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Users mailing list: Users at clusterlabs.org
> > https://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: <https://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20190314/8a59ef1f/attachment.html>