> On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Kit Gerrits <kitgerrits@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Might it be a good idea to stick them in the same cluster, but with > different failure domains? > That way, chances are higher of staying quorate. > > Just a thought... > > Kit > > -----Original Message----- > From: linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Xavier Montagutelli > Sent: woensdag 3 maart 2010 8:28 > To: linux clustering > Subject: Re: Shared storage across clustered VMs? > > On Tuesday 02 March 2010 23:50:26 Jeff Karpinski wrote: >> I've got a 4 node cluster back-ended with iSCSI storage that's happily >> running 20 or so VMs. I now have a request to present some shared >> storage across several of the VMs and am wondering what's the best way >> to accomplish this. GFS2? Can VMs even communicate back with the >> cluster for lock_dlm to work? >> >> Interested in how others have skinned this cat... > > I don't know if GFS2 is the best way to share data among your VMs. > > But if you go for GFS2, I suppose the clusters should be different : one > cluster for the hosts, and one cluster for the VMs having a shared disk with > GFS2. They have different purposes, you should not mix them. > > > > -- > Linux-cluster mailing list > Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster > Hi, I read that you should never mix domU and dom0 nodes in the same cluster due to quorum problems. Regards, Bernard -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
