Perhaps I should try it. But it seems like a step backwards. I don't
have enough hardware to run a cluster and experiment with a test
cluster to know when I can use the newer system.
scottb
jakub.suchy@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Scott Becker wrote:
Yes, slow at best. This list is better. Support is not the issue. I'm
shooting for 100% uptime with simple failover. There are too many problems
with the software and I'm a month behind schedule. The biggest problem is
the core system is malfunctioning. Smaller problem is that in the same test
I ran into the fencing issue that others have experienced, the menus are
too dynamic for the current fence_apc agent.
A month ago I thought, steep learning curve and then I'll be all set.
redhat.com gives the distinct impression that they are selling a completed
solution. I disagree.
Have you tried RHEL 4.6 cluster? It's setup is really smooth oposite to
RHEL 5.0, according to my experience. (As I said before, we will be
trying 5.1 in few days).
Jakub
--
Linux-cluster mailing list
Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
|
--
Linux-cluster mailing list
Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
