Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
There is in fact one drawback. If the load being shared is a burden for one to take on it's own, well that can cause a lot of problems when it is in a failed over state. On 7/29/06, Luciano Miguel Ferreira Rocha <strange at nsk.no-ip.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 10:00:49PM +0200, Ondrej Jombik wrote: > > On Sat, 29 Jul 2006, Luciano Miguel Ferreira Rocha wrote: > > > > >On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 09:27:08PM +0200, Ondrej Jombik wrote: > > >>- partition-A (service-A) will be master on machine1 and slave on > machine2 > > >>- partition-B (service-B) will be master on machine2 and slave on > machine1 > > >>Is this possible? > > >>Does someone have this in production? > > >Yes, just configure two different drbd resources. > > > > Thank you for your answer. I thought that this is possible. > > Anyone having this in production is welcomed to tell us so. > > I do. > > > Also I'm interested in you personal opinion if you consider this > > solution as a clever/good one. I'm not the expert in the topic, thus it > > is rather difficult for me to think about any drawbacks or possible > > problems that this setup can bring. > > You're distributing your load between two machines. That's a good thing > to do. An otherwise idle server will be put to good use instead of just > waiting for the other to fail. > > I see no drawback, only benefits, assuming that there's no convoluted > dependency between them. > > -- > lfr > 0/0 > _______________________________________________ > drbd-user mailing list > drbd-user at lists.linbit.com > http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user > -- "Do the actors on Unsolved Mysteries ever get arrested because they look just like the criminal they are playing?" Christopher -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/attachments/20060731/93ce7aea/attachment-0001.htm>