On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:35 AM, Adrian Allen <[email protected]> wrote:
> I suspect that you may not get an answer from anyone on this issue, because
> I don't think anyone else has yet gotten this working on disparate physical
> hosts. I was trying for a while, and although I did get some suggestions
> that might work, I haven't had time to try again to implement it.
>
> To be more specific, using fence_virt to manage KVM guests on different

Btw. fence_virsh != fence_virt
I've made that mistake often enough too :)

> physical hosts apparently hasn't been done yet.

I think it would work in a cman/pacemaker stack, but not corosync 2.x

>  But it would be useful to
> know what the behavior would be in that instance.
>
> It's possible that you might be able to sidestep the issue by treating your
> guests as resources managed by Pacemaker, so that the guests themselves
> never even know they are part of a cluster. I was going to look into this
> next if I couldn't figure out how to get qpid working.

You could also try David's brand new whitebox resources.
You define the VMs as resources and then use pacemaker_remoted (no
corosync required) to manage other resources that run inside them.
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems

Reply via email to