> -----Original Message----- > From: linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-cluster- > bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of jr > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 5:14 PM > To: linux clustering > Subject: RE: ZEN with GFS > > hi bernard, > wow, 200MB for a bunch of domUs ;) > but seriously, maybe it's a dm-multipath setting problem, i had kind of > the same (instead of having the guests filesystem images as files on a > gfs volume i just have on lun per guest); during a failover some of the > guests would become instable or even lose control over their disks. > my problem was that i forgot to set: > > no_path_retry queue > > in the settings for my storage. since i did that the domUs survive > multipath failovers nicely. > regards, > johannes > > > Hi, > > > > Sorry for the confusion here. I was saying the failover of the MPIO > > works nicely for the 1TB virtual disk (domU cluster) but not the > 200MB > > virtual disk (dom0 cluster) which contains all the virtual guests. > > > > As for the second part, I was saying such a setup allows the failover > of > > the domU machines as they are stored in the central virtual disk. The > > failover here refers to using the RHEL cluster to control the guests. > > > > But as the MPIO failover does not work nicely for the dom0 cluster, I > > may just keep the domU machines locally. > > > > Regards, > > Bernard > > > > > > -- > > 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 Oops.. some typo error there (its supposed to be 200G). Anyway not to hijack this thread, I shall try out the no_path_retry setting in the multipath.conf and post the results in a separate thread :) Thanks for the tip! Bernard -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
