On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 05:10 -0800, sara sodagar wrote: > Hi > I would be grateful if anyone could tell me if this > solution works or not? It looks like it will work fine. > As I have only 1 passive server , I should create 2 > fail over domain . > > Node A ,C (cluster service 1) > Node B , C (cluster service 2) > Node c : (Failover domain 1 : service 1, failover > domain2: service 2) > Each Cluster service comprises : ip address resource , > web serviver init script,file > system resource (gfs) Yup, you certainly can do that. > Also I would like to know what are the advantages of > using gfs in this solution over > other types of files systems (like ext3) , as there > are no 2 active servers writing on the same area at > the > same time. Note that multiple "readers" from a single EXT3 file system will not be reliable, either - so if you intend to mount on multiple servers (at all - not just read-only), then you should use GFS. If you are not trying to do the above, then the only practical advantage GFS gives you is the potential for slightly faster recovery (due to the fs already being mounted). For most people in this case, ext3 is fine. -- Lon -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
