[ClusterLabs] Sub-clusters / super-clusters?

[Vladislav Bogdanov]

Hi
You probably want to look at booth and tickets for a geo-clustering solution.


On August 3, 2021 11:40:54 AM Antony Stone <Antony.Stone at ha.open.source.it> 
wrote:

> On Tuesday 11 May 2021 at 12:56:01, Strahil Nikolov wrote:
>
>> Here is the example I had promised:
>>
>> pcs node attribute server1 city=LA
>> pcs node attribute server2 city=NY
>>
>> # Don't run on any node that is not in LA
>> pcs constraint location DummyRes1 rule score=-INFINITY city ne LA
>>
>> #Don't run on any node that is not in NY
>> pcs constraint location DummyRes2 rule score=-INFINITY city ne NY
>>
>> The idea is that if you add a node and you forget to specify the attribute
>> with the name 'city' , DummyRes1 & DummyRes2 won't be started on it.
>>
>> For resources that do not have a constraint based on the city -> they will
>> run everywhere unless you specify a colocation constraint between the
>> resources.
>
> Excellent - thanks.  I happen to use crmsh rather than pcs, but I've adapted
> the above and got it working.
>
> Unfortunately, there is a problem.
>
> My current setup is:
>
> One 3-machine cluster in city A running a bunch of resources between them, the
> most important of which for this discussion is Asterisk telephony.
>
> One 3-machine cluster in city B doing exactly the same thing.
>
> The two clusters have no knowledge of each other.
>
> I have high-availability routing between my clusters and my upstream telephony
> provider, such that a call can be handled by Cluster A or Cluster B, and if
> one is unavailable, the call gets routed to the other.
>
> Thus, a total failure of Cluster A means I still get phone calls, via Cluster
> B.
>
>
> To implement the above "one resource which can run anywhere, but only a single
> instance", I joined together clusters A and B, and placed the corresponding
> location constraints on the resources I want only at A and the ones I want
> only at B.  I then added the resource with no location constraint, and it runs
> anywhere, just once.
>
> So far, so good.
>
>
> The problem is:
>
> With the two independent clusters, if two machines in city A fail, then
> Cluster A fails completely (no quorum), and Cluster B continues working.  That
> means I still get phone calls.
>
> With the new setup, if two machines in city A fail, then _both_ clusters stop
> working and I have no functional resources anywhere.
>
>
> So, my question now is:
>
> How can I have a 3-machine Cluster A running local resources, and a 3-machine
> Cluster B running local resources, plus one resource running on either Cluster
> A or Cluster B, but without a failure of one cluster causing _everything_ to
> stop?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Antony.
>
> --
> One tequila, two tequila, three tequila, floor.
>
>                                                   Please reply to the list;
>                                                         please *don't* CC me.
> _______________________________________________
> Manage your subscription:
> https://lists.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> ClusterLabs home: https://www.clusterlabs.org/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.clusterlabs.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20210803/9b5b82c8/attachment.htm>