| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-users
Re: [Xen-users] remus vs. pacemaker/drbd?
Greg Woods wrote:
On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 09:28 -0600, Nick Couchman wrote:
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.
Actually, pacemaker can do live migrations with some limitations. If the
I have no experience with Remus, but from Nick's description of it, it
sounds like Remus might be a whole lot easier to set up and may be a
good way to go if all you care about is failover for your domU's, or if
you really need instantaneous failover in the event of a server crash.
All of this is well and good, but not to the point.
I'm using pacemaker and DRBD. It works. it's just a pain.
Has anybody on this list actually used Remus in production? Is it ready
for prime time? Or is it still beta (or alpha)?
Miles
--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In<fnord> practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
|
|
| |
|
Home