[Linux-cluster] Networking guidelines for RHCS across datacenters
brem.belguebli at gmail.com
Mon Jun 8 18:06:37 UTC 2009
Here's a link to illustrate the kind of setup I'm trying to setup with RHCS.
2009/6/5, Steven Dake <sdake at redhat.com>:
> On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 19:40 +0200, brem belguebli wrote:
> > 2009/6/5, Jon Schulz <jschulz at soapstonenetworks.com>:
> > Yes I would be interested to see what products you are
> > currently using to achieve this. In my proposed setup we are
> > actually completely database transaction driven. The problem
> > is the people higher up want active database <-> database
> > replication which will be problematic I know.
> > Still we also use DB (Oracle, Sybase) replication mechanisms
> > to address accidental data corruption, as mirroring being synchonous,
> > if something happens (someone intentionnaly alters the DB or
> > filesystem corruption) it will be on both legs of the mirror.
> > Outside of the data side of the equation, how tolerant is the
> > cluster network/heartbeat to latency assuming no packet loss?
> > Or more to the point, at what point does everyone in their
> > past experience see the heartbeat network become unreliable,
> > latency wise. E.g. anything over 30ms?
> The default configured timers for failure detection are quite high and
> retransmit many times for failed packets (for lossy networks). 30msec
> latency would pose no major problem, except performance. If you used
> posix locking and your machine->machine latency was 30msec, each posix
> lock would take 30.03 msec to grant or more, which may not meet your
> performance requirements.
> I can't recommend wan connections with totem (the protocol used in rhcs)
> because of the performance characteristics. If the performance of posix
> locks is not a high requirement, it should be functional.
> Linux-cluster mailing list
> Linux-cluster at redhat.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Linux-cluster