On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 9:10 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi > > I'm a little bit confused about stack choices : > > On this page we can see that there were 4 Corosync-based options : > http://theclusterguy.clusterlabs.org/post/907043024/introducing-the-pacemaker-master-control-process-for > > So, starting with 1.1.3, the following Corosync-based options are > possible: > 1. corosync + pacemaker plugin (v0) > 2. corosync + pacemaker plugin (v1) + mcp > 3. corosync + cpg + cman + mcp > 4. corosync + cpg + quorumd + mcp > > But on the other side, RH recommendation for stack under pacemaker is only > to put cman, so instead of corosync layer (+cpg ?) > and recommend to follow this procedure : > http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html/Clusters_from_Scratch/ch08.html > as RH will no more provide the corosync layer.
Not strictly true. They don't/won't ship the 'pacemaker plugin (v(0|1))' piece. So options 1 and 2 are out on RHEL. > > So I'm a little bit confused : > -does that mean that the future definitive stack is now Pacemaker/cman > (without anything else like cpg and/or quorumd) ? > -does that mean that it will be this Pacemaker/cman on RH ans SLES ? > -or do RH and SLES wil require a different stack under Pacemaker ? For RHEL6, option 3: corosync + cpg + cman + mcp For RHEL7+, option 4: corosync + cpg + quorumd + mcp For SLES, you'd need to ask Lars. > Thanks a lot for your response. > Regards > Alain > _______________________________________________ > Linux-HA mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
