[Pacemaker] heartbeat vs. corosync installation confusion

Lars Ellenberg lars.ellenberg at linbit.com
Wed Mar 9 04:08:34 EST 2011

On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 09:14:47AM +0100, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
> <dennisml at conversis.de> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I'm planning to setup a redundant storage system using centos5, pacemaker,
> > corosync, drbd, nfs and I'm wondering about the status of heartbeat vs.
> > corosync when it comes to the installation of the pacemaker subsystem of the
> > setup.
> >
> > From what I've learned lurking on the ML heartbeat is considered a "legacy"
> > part of the stack that is supposed to be replaced by corosync so my plan is
> > since this is a new setup to not bother with heartbeat and go straight for
> > the new corosync route. When I install pacemaker though (using the
> > clusterlabs rpms) it seems to not only pull in heartbeat automatically but
> > also enable its init script by default. Is this intended?
> > Can I safely disable the heartbeat init script when using corosync?
> yes
> >
> > Why am I required to install heartbeat when I want to use corosync in its
> > place?
> because it was built against both, and pulling in the libraries also
> pulls in the main package.
> not exactly optimal :(

I think that dependency nonsense has been fixed with more recent
heartbeat packages.

: Lars Ellenberg
: LINBIT | Your Way to High Availability
: DRBD/HA support and consulting http://www.linbit.com

More information about the Pacemaker mailing list