[Openais] Openais Digest, Vol 90, Issue 1

Darren Thompson darrent at akurit.com.au
Sat Jan 28 06:55:17 UTC 2012


Mumtaz

I'm happy t post some example config files etc if that would help.

Don't forget, if you are using VLANS the link needs to be a "trunk link"
so that it passes all the VLAN tags etc.

Darren

On Fri, 2012-01-27 at 09:54 -0800, M Siddiqui wrote:

> Thanks Darren!
> 
> 
> 
> Yes I want to separate hearbeat traffic from other IO and your
> suggestion 
> about setting up VLAN with interface bonding sounds interesting; I
> will try this option.
> 
> 
> thanks again,
> 
> 
> kind regards,
> mumtaz
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 7:46 PM, Darren Thompson
> <darrent at akurit.com.au> wrote:
> 
>         mumtaz
>         
>         I'm still not convinced that your use of corosync ring
>         redundancy is even solving the correct problem in your case,
>         it looks to me that you have an invalid network configuration
>         with the two interfaces on the same subnet, that may be the
>         root of your problems.(You have two interfaces in the same
>         lan, each with separate IP addresses... I'm not sure that is
>         even good practice).
>         
>         I'm not sure why you say this: "Also, bonding of interfaces
>         does not work for me as I need to interfaces each with a
>         separate address." as I have regularly used exactly that
>         configuration without error for the last two or so years...
>         
>         If you want to separate the Heatrtbeat traffic from other IO
>         traffic you could just setup VLAN interfaces over the top of
>         the bond.
>         
>         In either case if you use 802.3ad mode it gives you almost
>         twice the bandwidth per host, so you get fault tolerance and
>         more bandwidth... win/win.
>         
>         Try it, you may be surprised...
>         
>         Regards
>         Darren
>         
>         
>         
>         On 26 January 2012 10:07, M Siddiqui <msiddiqui at live.com.pk>
>         wrote:
>         
>                         
>                         Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:02:39 +1100
>                         From: Tim Serong <tserong at suse.com>
>                         To: openais at lists.linux-foundation.org,
>                         discuss at corosync.org
>                         Subject: Re: [Openais] HA Cluster Connected
>                         over VPN
>                         Message-ID: <4F1F70CF.6030705 at suse.com>
>                         Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1;
>                         format=flowed
>                         
>                         On 01/25/2012 12:32 PM, M Siddiqui wrote:
>                         > Hi there,
>                         >
>                         > I have a situation where two cluster nodes
>                         are connected over the VPN;
>                         > each node
>                         > is configured with two interfaces to provide
>                         ring redundancy for corosync:
>                         >
>                         > NODE1:
>                         >    eth1: 192.168.1.111/24
>                         <http://192.168.1.111/24>
>                         >    eth2: 192.168.1.112/24
>                         <http://192.168.1.112/24>
>                         >
>                         > NODE2:
>                         >    eth1: 192.168.1.113/24
>                         <http://192.168.1.113/24>
>                         >    eth2: 192.168.1.114/24
>                         <http://192.168.1.114/24>
>                         >
>                         > corosync version 1.4.2
>                         > transport udpu (multicast has the same
>                         issue)
>                         >
>                         > Since two nodes are geographically
>                         distributed and connected over the VPN,
>                         > configuring each interface in a different
>                         subnet is not an option here.
>                         >
>                         > Now corosync got confused due to same
>                         subnet; how we can handle this
>                         > situation?
>                         > What is the experts recommendation? Thanks
>                         in advance for the answer.
>                         
>                         I'm pretty sure if you're doing multiple
>                         rings, they need to be on
>                         separate subnets.  Question: if you're going
>                         over a single openVPN
>                         instance, you only really have one
>                         communication path between the nodes,
>                         right?  In which case, redundant rings won't
>                         actually help.
>                         
>                 
>                 
>                 I see. Thanks! 
>                 
>                 
>                 Actually in my setup I am using two interfaces on each
>                 node: 
>                 eth1 for heartbeat and eth2 for some data aggregation
>                 from other
>                 hosts on the same network as well as hosts across the
>                 VPN.
>                 
>                 
>                 Now I agree there in one communication path for hosts
>                 across the
>                 VPN but we can avoid congestion while aggregating data
>                 from hosts
>                 on the same network; (I mean all host on one end of
>                 VPN). In this
>                 situation, even if we don't configure eth2 as a backup
>                 ring in corosync.conf 
>                 still corosync got confused and does not work.
>                 
>                 
>                 Also, bonding of interfaces does not work for me as I
>                 need to interfaces
>                 each with a separate address.
>                 
>                 
>                 regards,
>                 mumtaz
>                 
>                 
>                         
>                         
>                         Also, you probably want the
>                         discuss at corosync.org list.
>                         openais at lists.linux-foundation.org is
>                         deprecated, for lack of a better term.
>                         
>                         Regards,
>                         
>                         Tim
>                         --
>                         Tim Serong
>                         Senior Clustering Engineer
>                         SUSE
>                         tserong at suse.com
>                         
>                 
>                 
>                 
>                 _______________________________________________
>                 Openais mailing list
>                 Openais at lists.linux-foundation.org
>                 https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/openais
>                 
>         
>         
> 
> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/openais/attachments/20120128/d72576dc/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Openais mailing list