I support it !!! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Barry" <Christopher.Barry@xxxxxxxxxx> To: "linux clustering" <linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 10:40 AM Subject: Re: I give up > On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 17:27 -0500, James Parsons wrote: >> Scott Becker wrote: >> > snip... >> > Case two. I remove one node from the cluster to maintain it. Now I >> > have a two node cluster. Same issues as above. Luci wants to set >> > two_node = 1 in this case instead of just dealing with expected votes >> > = 1. >> >> I know why Luci is doing this -- she sees the cluster reduced from three >> nodes to two nodes and configures it (as the large majority or our >> typical users consider) appropriately. When you are finished maintaining >> the node and you tell Luci to add it back in to the cluster, she will >> remove those configuration attributes. >> >> The sticking point seems to be your particular desired cluster behavior >> and the fact that it lies outside of what was expected for cluster suite. >> >> If this is not appropriate behavior for you, then don't use Luci. You >> are free to use a text editor on the cluster.conf file and propagate it >> manually via the command line on one of the nodes, as you are free to >> edit the source code and add ssh support to your favorite fence agent. >> You are free to go off the map, and the members of this list (including >> many of the Red Hat engineers who write cluster code and watch this >> list) will assist you in your expedition as much as possible. We will >> all try our best to help you get where you want to go (and I think you >> would have to agree that you have had a very respectable response rate >> for your queries this last month - many have tried to offer you >> assistance), but if we can't think of a way to stretch the software to >> your needs, then we just can't. > > Everyone here has been very helpful to me during my trials and > tribulations. I'm pretty sure I would have bailed without it. But there > is one thing I think would greatly help a lot of people - myself for > sure - and that is accurate and complete documentation of the totality > of the cluster conf file - with lots of example config files. The one > schema for 4.x and 5.x doc I have found is incomplete. All documentation > I have seen regarding setup and admin warns the user repeatedly NOT to > edit the configuration file yourself! But the fact is, using the GUI > apps, both conga and piranha, is *excruciatingly* slow and painful. > That, and it does not help you understand how it actually works. > > Frankly, and not to hurt anybody's feelings, or diminish the effort that > has gone into the GUI projects, but manual editing of the file is the > only reasonable way to set this up. Complete information on all of the > tags and their precise meanings and organization would be way more > valuable than a GUI that does not really work all that well. I'm betting > it would take less developer time too. > > Heck, If I can get all the data, I will write the doc and put it on the > GFS wiki. That wiki is a great start. Lon, James or anyone - feel free > to send me all conf file info you have and example configs and I will > try to distill it all into something helpful. > >> I do want to disagree strongly, however, with your blanket suggestion >> that this software is not complete, and is not a cluster solution. It is >> a solution for many, many users...not all of whom are RH customers. It >> is just not a solution for you, my friend. >> >> Thanks for your many constructive comments. I hope you keep trying the >> software - we are here to help as best we can. I haven't given up on you >> *quite* yet! :) >> >> -J >> > > As it stands, I've plodded through, and have a 6-node virtual cluster > that spans 2 ESX servers, that can stay up to the last man, (using a > quorum disk), serving desktops for developers via vnc and xdmcp, and ssh > sessions and nfs mounts - all load balanced through HA directors. Pretty > damn sweet if I do say so myself ;) > I had to write the fence script for it, and replace nanny because it > continuously segfaulted, but once a GFS Linux cluster is finally > configured and running, it kicks serious butt, and it is indeed worth > it. The thing is, if everyone gave up, where would OpenSource be today? > > -- > Regards, > -C > > -- > 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
