HA-LVM vs CLVM

[Zoran Salahovic Lendra]

Heya,
I think that you shoud definitely use Conga to create your initial 
configuratin files and test the cluster. It's easy and helpfull,... later 
you can edit them and also use command line, scripts,... and so on. Take a 
look at this small article to see what Conga provides, and also it's 
architecture:  
http://magazine.redhat.com/2007/03/19/teaching-your-cluster-and-storage-systems-to-dance-an-introduction-to-conga/ 


more info here: 
http://www.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/5.4/html/Cluster_Suite_Overview/s1-clumgmttools-overview-CSO.html#s2-conga-overview-CSO 


you can try creating a resource and see if you like it.

"... shared resources to be used by high-availability services,... consist 
of file systems, IP addresses, NFS mounts and exports, and user-created 
scripts that are available to any high-availability service in the 
cluster. "

About your main fear I would sugest a good User manuals for the people who 
is going to work whit it,... And also Panadol hehe


Reagards,
  Zoran 




"urgrue" <urgrue at bulbous.org> 
 
Enviado por: redhat-list-bounces at redhat.com
02/02/2010 18:34
Por favor, responda a
General Red Hat Linux discussion list <redhat-list at redhat.com>


Para
"General Red Hat Linux discussion list" <redhat-list at redhat.com>, "General 
Red Hat Linux discussion list" <redhat-list at redhat.com>
cc

Asunto
Re: HA-LVM vs CLVM






On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 05:50 -0700, "Matt Iavarone"
<matt.iavarone at gmail.com> wrote:
> You don't need ricci or luci for either of these, but they do make it
> easier to build and manage your clusters.  You can use
> system-config-cluster in their place.

I'll take a look at system-config-cluster. The manual just made it sound
like its kinda deprecated in favor of conga. And I'm not so crazy about
conga, it seems I'm able to get strange behaviour out of it even doing
the simplest things in the most pristine setups, which partly explains
my reluctance to use  RHC in all its glory. 

> You can use, I assume, use just ha-lvm and gfs2 without rgmanager or
> cman, but how will you manage the filesystem if the node fails?  Will
> you manually mount it on your backup node?  And there are many options
> for a fence device.  A red hat cluster using clvm and gfs2 is simple
> and easy to manage.

Manual mount/activate on the backup node is fine and in fact required in
my case, for the same reason that it needs to be ext3 - my employer is
ultra-conservative. So I'm not really sure where all this leaves me...

The main fear, and the reason I don't want to just "not mount it" on the
passive node as suggested by others, is that some helpdesk newbie or
careless person goes and starts it on the passive node - very probably
destroying the whole thing. Without any measure in place to at the very
least produce a warning, it's a bit too plausible a scenario.

-- 
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request at redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list