[Pacemaker] gfs2 in the centos 6.0

[Andrew Beekhof]

On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Viacheslav Biriukov
<v.v.biriukov at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all.
> Now in the pacemaker documentation you propose to use CMAN instead of the
> pacemaker  crm for the gfs2
> (http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html/Clusters_from_Scratch/ch08s02.html).

No, cman instead of Pacemaker's home grown membership and quorum plugin.

> But in the google cache we can find the next link
> - http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/en-US/Pacemaker/1.1/html/Clusters_from_Scratch/ch08s03.html
> What does this mean?

It means you shouldn't go digging around in google caches :-)

Rightly or wrongly, the decision was made to no longer ship the .pcmk
controld variants in Fedora and RHEL.
At that point, it no longer made much sense to base the document on them.

> Does pacemaker:controld solution is'n stable?

It is stable in that it works, and SUSE seems very happy with it.
But it was only ever an intermediate step towards a stack that
exclusively used corosync for membership and quorum.
The only thing that really matters is that Pacemaker and the controlds
get membership/quorum from the same source.
It turned out that adding CMAN support to Pacemaker was the simplest
way to achieve that on the most distros.

> Can we go
> production with this in the Centos 6.0?

Sure.

>
> Tnx
> --
> Viacheslav Biriukov
> BR
> http://biriukov.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pacemaker mailing list: Pacemaker at oss.clusterlabs.org
> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker
>
> Project Home: http://www.clusterlabs.org
> Getting started: http://www.clusterlabs.org/doc/Cluster_from_Scratch.pdf
> Bugs:
> http://developerbugs.linux-foundation.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Pacemaker
>
>