- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - Linux
- >
- Re: Clustering RedHat Linux
Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Forums
Discussions
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО01-26-2010 04:55 AM
тАО01-26-2010 04:55 AM
Clustering RedHat Linux
I understand the Serviceguard for Linux is being deprecated. We are looking to implement a RedHat cluster over about 300km. Storage will be replicated asynchronously. Do you know if this sort of distance cluster is doable in RedHat Cluster Suite or do we have to use Symantec or some other vendor to get clusters working over this distance with RedHat?
Any pointers would be gratefully recieved.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО01-26-2010 12:32 PM
тАО01-26-2010 12:32 PM
Re: Clustering RedHat Linux
docs.hp.com/en/5900-0380/5900-0380.pdf
"There is, as yet, no supported configuration or solution on RHCS that can be used for setting up an extended distance cluster."
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО01-26-2010 04:52 PM
тАО01-26-2010 04:52 PM
Re: Clustering RedHat Linux
Such a scenario, unsupported might be possible with enough band width. Otherwise RHCS won't do it for you.
A manual fail over scheme might work with continuous data replication through a fast line.
SEP
Owner of ISN Corporation
http://isnamerica.com
http://hpuxconsulting.com
Sponsor: http://hpux.ws
Twitter: http://twitter.com/hpuxlinux
Founder http://newdatacloud.com
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО01-27-2010 02:02 AM
тАО01-27-2010 02:02 AM
Re: Clustering RedHat Linux
I had already downloaded that document, the XDC option for Linux mentioned in the document seemed more of a Metro Cluster style option which is why I'd not taken it as gospel. I didn't believe frankly that it wouldn't be possible to cluster RHEL in a similar fashion to a Continental Cluster or Veritas Cluster Server with Global Cluster Option, in it's native form.
Two RHEL clusters, 300km apart asynchronously related so as to be able to take on each others workloads in disaster. My only problem is that the VCS option isn't supported on Itanium, so it's not an ideal fit either.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО01-27-2010 09:07 AM
тАО01-27-2010 09:07 AM
Re: Clustering RedHat Linux
I agree with the earlier response that you should set up 2 clusters and a method (with human intervention?) to switch between the clusters after a failure. When you are using asynchronous replication, with the possibility of data loss, making sure you don't have a "false failover" may be a good tradeoff.