It's worth noting that these are slightly different solutions. Remus keeps a
running (but paused), completely synchronized version of your domU(s), and,
when it senses that the original domU is not available, unpauses the standby
domU from it's last synchronized state. This is really any extension of live
migration, as remus is just continually live migrating your memory and disk
data, but never shuts down the original or unpauses the standby version unless
something happens to the original. Pacemaker/DRBD, on the other hand, just
synchronizes the data, and if it detects that one of the domUs has died, starts
it up somewhere else. So, with Remus, the theory/goal is 0 downtime of your
domU, whereas Pacemaker simply minimizes downtime to a certain point - the time
it takes to detect failure and boot the new domU.
-Nick
>>> On 2010/09/06 at 15:40, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> Anybody have any experience and/or opinions re. Remus vs. Pacemaker/DRBD
> as a high-availability solution for a very small cluster (2 machines)?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Miles Fidelman
--------
This e-mail may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use
of the intended recipient. If this email is not intended for you, or you are
not responsible for the delivery of this message to the intended recipient,
please note that this message may contain SEAKR Engineering (SEAKR)
Privileged/Proprietary Information. In such a case, you are strictly
prohibited from downloading, photocopying, distributing or otherwise using this
message, its contents or attachments in any way. If you have received this
message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this e-mail and
delete the message from your mailbox. Information contained in this message
that does not relate to the business of SEAKR is neither endorsed by nor
attributable to SEAKR.
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
Home