Serviceguard vs Veritas Cluster Server

[Jeff Barber]

Looking to install a cluster solution for an Openview implementation (probably on a couple of N-Classes). Can't decide whether to go for Serviceguard or VCS. Anybody willing to help with pros and cons of each solution? Also does anybody know how long much longer Serviceguard is going to be around?

[Kent Ostby]

Jeff -- I work on the ServiceGuard team here at the Response Center and ServiceGuard is going to be around for quite a long time.

ServiceGuard is one of HP's most successful software products in terms of sales, services, and support.

I havent had much exposure to VCS and I'm moderately biased towards MC/SG.

I do know that all VCS support comes out of Veritas versus Serviceguard support coming out of HP.

Not sure on distances that VCS can cover, but one plus for SG is that you can have it cover a local area (regular ServiceGuard), a Metropolitan area (Metro Cluster), and a long distance (Continental Cluster).

Best regards,

Kent M. Ostby

[Alzhy]

The same is commonly on SUN environments -- whether to go with Sun Cluster 3.0 or VCS 3.0...

My usual answer is -- if the site/enterprise has expertise on Veritas products (Volume Manager, the Editions and others)-- then I'd recommend VCS.

If the site is "fresh" -- ie. Admins will be going to training, etc... -- then HP's Clustering solutions is what I will recommend.

[Jeff Barber]

Thanks for the info guys. Anybody else like to contribute to the debate - especially if you've got experience of SG and VCS.

[Steven E. Protter]

Veritas is out there shopping their product as a simpler ServiceGuard alternative.

I even had a vendor try and sell me that line.

We bought ServiceGuard and early next year we'll be installing it after some education.

I'm sure by then we'll be able to help each other out.

SEP

[Geoff Wild]

I've been using MC/SG for almost 3 years now.

It is a great clustering product.

If you are going to cluster Openview and run it on HP hardware - then I'd go with MS/SG for support reasons alone. I don't know mush about VCS, but heard it is comparable...

What it comes down to is what you are comfortable with. If you don't know neither, then go with MC/Sg...if you have a strong HP-UX background, then go with MC/SG....I would only go with VCS if you have used that before or have it already installed in your environment....

Rgds...Geoff

[Jeff Barber]

Steve/Geoff thanks. I know SG reasonably well - I've used it off and on for about five years now but I need some ammo to win the case for SG when as you say VCS is being sold as a simpler alternative. Anybody know if I can win the case on cost grounds?

[Andrew Cowan]

I know that it isn't directly relevant to your cluster, but considering using Veritas can give you longer term benefits if you end-up with a hetrogenious environment. For instance if you had a mixture of Sun and HP, then you can use the same product enterprise-wide, and this will save you on training and support costs.

[Jdamian · Accepted solution]

Hi.

My HP boxes run MC ServiceGuard but my Solaris 8 boxes run VCS.

1. Advantages for MC ServiceGuard
a) it's fully supported by MC Support Team.
b) You can configure your packets and cluster because much processes are implemented as shell scripts.

2. Disadvantages for MC ServiceGuard
a) You cannot "freeze" a DiskGroup (a package in SG), i.e., you cannot order to cluster to ignore events from package.
b) There is no GUI for admin.
c) Only available for HP-UX (I'm not sure if also for Linux)

3. Advantages for Veritas Cluster Server
a) Some useful funcionalities as "freeze" a package.
b) A easy-to-use GUI is available. There is also a Windows GUI client.
c) Available for HP-UX and for Solaris.

4. Disadvantages for Veritas Cluster Server
a) HP sees as a 3rd party product.
b) It's no easy to modify in order to add new functionalities (in my case I find very difficult to add a task to rotate an Oracle log before starting database. In SG it's very easy)

[Stephen Doud]

A couple of corrections to what Damian said...

ServiceGuard Manager, which runs on HPUX, LINUX and Windows platforms is a free GUI. It not only monitors SG clusters but also permits the administrator to manage the cluster. Downloadable from http://software.hp.com

SG Mgr A.03.00.01 can manage HP-UX (PA and IPF) and Linux (IA32 and IPF(Itanium)) SG clusters.

Serviceguard for Linux has been available for several years. It is currently supported on the Proliant platform
In September 2003: version A.11.14.02 was introduced and supports
- RedHat Advanced Server 2.1, with SCSI support using kernel 2.4.9-e.25 (a patch is required)
- United Linux 1.0. also with SCSI support using service pack SP2A

Serviceguard will soon support selected HP Itanium-based platforms.

-sd

[Joe Short]

Another factor in the for Service guard column is flexibility. MCSG is very flexible, and can be implemented in a multitude of custom manners, to accomplish just about any HA need. I've been doing MCSG installation and configurations for clients for the last 4 years, and working with it as an admin for 2 years before that. I can set it up so you can tell it to ignore certain specified events. VCS is pretty much a caned product, you get what Veritas says you get, although there is room for some customization, it isn't as flexible as MCSG.
And having HP software running on HP hardware means you only need to pay one support contract, and you have only one number to call for support. It may seem trivial, but when the chaos starts, it becomes quite evident how valuable having your support in a single place truly is.

[Jeff Barber]

Thanks a lot guys. Some food for thought. I was probably always going to propose SG anyway but it's worth looking at the alternatives to see what you might be missing.