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

Re: [Linux-cluster] Starter Cluster / GFS



Gordan,

I did not ask for bonding.  This should work.  I asked for multiple independent links - different networking interfaces configured for different IP subnets mapping to different VLANS.

STP is, these days, run on a per VLAN basis. Having multiple links in different VLANs protects against important classes of network failures.  Bonded interface does not do it. This must be integrated in the clustering software.

Regards,

Chris Jankowski

-----Original Message-----
From: linux-cluster-bounces redhat com [mailto:linux-cluster-bounces redhat com] On Behalf Of Gordan Bobic
Sent: Thursday, 11 November 2010 21:08
To: linux clustering
Subject: Re: [Linux-cluster] Starter Cluster / GFS

Jankowski, Chris wrote:
> Gordan,
> 
> I do understand the mechanism.  I was trying to gently point out that 
> this behaviour is unacceptable for my commercial IP customers. The 
> customers buy clusters for high availability. Loosing the whole 
> cluster due to single component failure - hearbeat link is not 
> acceptable. The heartbeat link is a huge SPOF. And the cluster design 
> does not support redundant links for heartbeat.
> 
> Also, none of the commercially available UNIX clusters or Linux 
> clusters (HP ServiceGuard, Veritas, SteelEye) would display this type 
> of behaviour and they do not clobber cluster filesystems.  So, it is 
> possible to achieve acceptable reaction to this type of failure.

My point was that you can easily overcome the race by introducing a staggered delay into fencing that works around the race condition.

I never tried, but are you sure bonded devices don't work for heartbeat?

Gordan

--
Linux-cluster mailing list
Linux-cluster redhat com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster


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