[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Linux-cluster] Higher Grained Definition ofIP AddressAssignments

In that case, might it be easier to simply use the host IP adresses and not the cluster IP's?
(the application will need to handle up/down events itself)

From: linux-cluster-bounces redhat com [mailto:linux-cluster-bounces redhat com] On Behalf Of Dustin Henry Offutt
Sent: dinsdag 15 juni 2010 14:40
To: linux clustering
Subject: Re: [Linux-cluster] Higher Grained Definition ofIP AddressAssignments

I've spent the past year architecting an HA cluster with RHCS and it's working wonderfully. I have not seen anything superior.

Due to a new customer-driven feature of our software, we need to add the ability for a cluster service/resource group to have up to eight distinct IPs on one particular network due to the software being made highly available via RHCS performing its own load balancing. Placing the load balancing elsewhere is not an option due to the nature of the product.

Regarding "OCF_RESKEY_," will google more on this and appreciate the tip. Must work this out some way.

~ Dusty

C. Handel wrote:
[define interface of cluster controlled ip resource]

/usr/share/cluster/ip.sh appears to perform the link-monitoring in the

This is a resource agent script. What attributes a resource agent
accepts can be found by calling it with the option meta-data

/usr/share/cluster/ip.sh meta-data

There is no attribute interface. The agent will add the additional
address to the first interface that is in the same subnet.

You could edit the script and add a parameter interface yourself. Add
a new parameter into the XML at the beginning and access it in the
script with OCF_RESKEY_...

I don't understand what you are trying to do. If you are only handling
network interfaces as services, then rhcs is most likely the wrong
tool. If you would explain your goal we could probably suggest other


Linux-cluster mailing list
Linux-cluster redhat com


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.829 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2939 - Release Date: 06/15/10 08:35:00

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]