[Pacemaker] Multiple independent two-node clusters side-by-side?

[Vadym Chepkov]

On Oct 28, 2010, at 2:53 AM, Dan Frincu wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Andreas Ntaflos wrote:
>> 
>> Hi, 
>> 
>> first time poster, short time Pacemaker user. I don't think this is a 
>> very difficult question to answer but I seem to be feeding Google the 
>> wrong search terms. I am using Pacemaker 1.0.8 and Corosync 1.2.0 on 
>> Ubuntu 10.04.1 Server.
>> 
>> Short version: How do I configure multiple independent two-node clusters 
>> where the nodes are all on the same subnet? Only the two nodes that form 
>> the cluster should see that cluster's resources and not any other. 
>> 
>> Is this possible? Where should I look for more and detailed information?
>>   
> You need to specify different multicast sockets for this to work. Under the /etc/corosync/corosync.conf you have the interface statements. Even if all servers are in the same subnet, you can "split them apart" by defining unique multicast sockets.
> An example should be useful. Let's say that you have only one interface statement in the corosync file.
>         interface {
>                 ringnumber: 0
>                 bindnetaddr: 192.168.1.0 
>                 mcastaddr: 239.192.168.1 
>                 mcastport: 5405 
>         }
> The multicast socket in this case is 239.192.168.1:5405. All nodes that should be in the same cluster should use the same multicast socket. In your case, the first two nodes should use the same multicast socket. How about the other two nodes? Use another unique multicast socket.
>         interface {
>                 ringnumber: 0
>                 bindnetaddr: 192.168.1.0 
>                 mcastaddr: 239.192.168.112 
>                 mcastport: 5405 
>         }
> Now the multicast socket is 239.192.168.112:5405. It's unique, the network address is the same, but you add this config (edit according to your environment, this is just an example) to your other two nodes. So you have cluster1 formed out of node1 and node2 linked to 239.192.168.1:5405 and cluster2 formed out of node3 and node4 linked to 239.192.168.112:5405.
> 
> This way, the clusters don't _see_ each other, so you can reuse the resource ID's and see only two nodes per cluster.


Out of curiosity, RFC2365 defines "local scope" multicast space 239.255.0.0/16 and "organizational local scope" 239.192.0.0/14.

Seems most examples for pacemaker cluster use later. But since most clusters are not spread across different subnets, wouldn't it be more appropriate to use the former?

Thanks,
Vadym