[Linux-cluster] best qdisk location

emmanuel segura emi2fast at gmail.com
Wed Jan 25 12:57:48 UTC 2012

I alway used the second option and i never found any problem

2012/1/25 Jan Huijsmans <Jan.Huijsmans at interaccess.nl>

> Hello,
> When checking the RedHat cluster set-up I was surprised to find the quorum
> disk located
> on the same LUN as the database. This location was chosen because the
> database LUN
> needs to be accessable for the node to be able to service the environment.
> It's a logical choice.
> However, at this moment we're experiencing latency on the storage, which
> also hinders
> the usage of the qdisk. There are lots of time-outs on disk activity which
> won't hinder the
> application much, at least when the cluster won't reboot due to time-outs
> on the qdisk.
> For me the logical choice for the qdisk would be a seperate LUN on a fast
> disk, we have
> a quorum disk library for the SAN with unused disks, instead on the same
> LUN that's
> being used by the application. (in a cabinet that's used by the complete
> environment.
> This way the qdisk can be fast and it's a real quorum LUN, as it's located
> on the quorum
> location of the SAN controllers.
> My main question is which method would give the most stable environment
> for the cluster.
> 1. qdisk on same LUN as application
> 2. qdisk on seperate, isolated, LUN
> I would choose the second option, but I'm not sure which would give the
> stability I'm seeking.
> Greetings,
> Jan Huijsmans
> --
> Linux-cluster mailing list
> Linux-cluster at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster

esta es mi vida e me la vivo hasta que dios quiera
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/linux-cluster/attachments/20120125/a45da1a9/attachment.htm>

More information about the Linux-cluster mailing list