Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 10:07:08AM -0400, Dan Gahlinger wrote: > stonith won't help with what we're trying to test. > > using both communications channels seems it won't solve this issue either. > > we wan't heartbeat to fail drbd over if the main (or "public") interface is > down. > the machine may still be operational, but the network could be down - for a > number of reasons. thats what the "ping nodes" are for. > if we monitor both communications channels as you say, it'll never fail over > because the cross-over cable > for the drbd data never fails. the main point of having multiple comm channels is not to "monitor" the single channel, but to provide redundant communications. (-> read up on split brain, and why you want to avoid it) > we currently have heartbeat monitoring the "public" ip of the other server. > we can't have the drbd data on the same interface - because that could end > up being too much traffic > and would limit our bandwidth to do any real work. you are misunderstanding the main purpose of the heartbeats here. > monitoring the cross-over (drbd) link is equally pointless. drbd manages > that itself quite well. see above. > if we disable heartbeat for drbd monitoring, then we lack the ability to > umount and remount the partitions if servers fail. huh? > it seems that in this instance heartbeat can only be used for a full server > failure (lost power). read up on the concept of "ping nodes". -- : Lars Ellenberg Tel +43-1-8178292-0 : : LINBIT Information Technologies GmbH Fax +43-1-8178292-82 : : Vivenotgasse 48, A-1120 Vienna/Europe http://www.linbit.com : __ please use the "List-Reply" function of your email client.