[Linux-cluster] RHCS separate datacenter

[Brem Belguebli]

On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 13:19 -0400, rhurst at bidmc.harvard.edu wrote:
> FWIIW, I thought the question was in regards to Cluster Suite (RHCS), not Global File System (GFS)?  In that regard, what does fencing have to do with this?

Fencing is mandatory (otherwise not supported by RH) even if not using
GFS. How do you deal with split brain if not fencing or suiciding ?

> @Ana, are you concerned about pulse heartbeat?  That should not be an issue, but more so, there will (probably) be no kernel client-session tracking for fail-over, because your remote datacenter is not on the same physical LAN.  That means if you did fail-over, the virtual IP will takeover, but all current sessions would be dropped and need to re-connect.
> 
> Also, from my understanding of Linux IPVS on which RHCS is based, is that it can support a remote datacenter, without spanning tree, if you use the tunneling option (not direct or nat)... although we have never tried it.
> 
RHCS is NOT based on IPVS
.
> But your "support" question sounds like it is aimed squarely at Red Hat should something break down, and not about Linux IPVS being capable of working or not.  If your implementation works solely with the tools Red Hat supplies, then I see no reason why they would not support an issue should it present itself during your QA.
> 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-cluster-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:linux-cluster-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of brem belguebli
> Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 9:41 AM
> To: linux clustering
> Subject: Re: [Linux-cluster] RHCS separate datacenter
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Fencing is the blocking point, in case you want site disaster to be automatically handled.
> 
> Brem
> 
> 2010/8/12 Laszlo Beres <laszlo at beres.me>:
> > On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Marchezetti Macedo, Ana Cristina 
> > <anacristina.macedo at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I have heard that RHCS has not been designed for use across separate 
> >> locations but I didn't find any red hat statment about it? Is it 
> >> supported by Red Hat?
> >
> > IMHO as long as you can ensure all RHCS requirements between different 
> > geographical locations, it should not be a problem. But that's true, 
> > there is no definitive support for SRDF or other storage replication, 
> > as it exists in Sun Cluster for instance.
> >
> > --
> > László Béres            Unix system engineer 
> > http://www.google.com/profiles/beres.laszlo
> >
> > --
> > Linux-cluster mailing list
> > Linux-cluster at redhat.com
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
> 
> --
> Linux-cluster mailing list
> Linux-cluster at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
> 
> --
> Linux-cluster mailing list
> Linux-cluster at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster