On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 10:22:37AM +0100, maria perez wrote: > Thank you very much for your help, Michael. > Excuse me, but my english is not enough good. I try write correctly in an > understable way,but not always I achieve it. Yeah, no worries. I've been speaking english all my life, and I still screw it up regularly. ^_^ [snipped what got answered by others] > My system now had a single point of failure, I would like, if it is > possible that the two nodes were servers lock_gulm . I understand in your > message I can run the two nodes like servers lock_gulm having only two > nodes but declaring three nodes in the file cluster.ccs in the sentence > servers=" " and using only two of the three (really the third node not > exits). In the file nodes.ccs : I had to declare the three nodes too??Nor?? > Do I undersand you well?? Yes, that right. With this setup, one node will stop when the other dies. But you will not need to reboot both, just the one that died. Not an ideal situation, but a little better. All this comes from the fact that gulm was not designed with small in mind. -- Michael Conrad Tadpol Tilstra Chemicals, n.: Noxious substances from which modern foods are made.
Attachment:
pgprliTHT99dd.pgp
Description: PGP signature
