On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 11:32 AM, <martin.br...@icw.de> wrote: > Hi there, > I want to realize a rather complex setup, so I have a couple of questions: > > > The cluster (as a shared nothing variant) should provide: > > * 4 services (=server) depending on each other. > * 3 of them can only be realized as active/passive failover, synched with > DRBD (M/S) > * The servers running the application will be Virtual Machines. So I will > end up with three master-slave pairs each providing a VIP with a shared > drbd-device in a master-slave setup. > Most resources could only run on one of two distinct server nodes > (active/passive). In sum I will have eight nodes resp. VMs > Would you recommend the administration of all nodes with a common > corosync/pacemaker cluster?
personally, i'd say yes > I am a bit afraid of having too many location and collocation constraints > for all these resources. Is there a way to define subclusters? Not yet, thats coming in 1.1 > How would > one bind a resource group to specific nodes - as a constraint to > hostnames? You can do it in one of two ways. Start reading here: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.0/html/Pacemaker_Explained/s-resource-location.html#id1908403 > Or would it be better to have 4 two node clusters communicating on > disjunct/ subnets, with the advantage of a less complex crm configuration? > > Is there a neat method to administer four separate clusters from a console > or workstation? > Without introducing a new SPOF? You can connect to the cluster from non-cluster nodes: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.0/html/Pacemaker_Explained/ch-advanced-options.html#s-remote-connection _______________________________________________ Pacemaker mailing list Pacemaker@oss.clusterlabs.org http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
