On 01/11/2013 11:45 AM, Vladimir Voznesensky wrote:
Why do you need a centralized corosync? It's not intended for
centralized usage, it's really ok to use it de-centralized.
In the typical use case, the corosync daemon running on each node
represents the existence of that node in the cluster, as it joins the
totem ring. In our case, you could view the corosync daemon representing
the entire chassis of 12 blades and not the individual blade. So the
corosync cluster in our case is not a cluster of nodes, but a "cluster
of group of nodes". That is why we want to run a single daemon per
chassis and not a daemon on each node.
Regards,
Shridhar
11.01.2013 19:44, Shridhar Sahukar пишет:
Hi,
We are trying to use corosync to bridge communication across two or
more ATCA chassis. We do not want to run the corosync daemon on all
the blades of the ATCA chassis, but we would need the applications
running on all the cards to be able to talk to the centralized
corosync deamon -- for example to use the cpg service.
The existing architecture of corosync does not seem to support the
above mentioned use case as it assumes that the corosync daemon is
running on all the cards and the client and server are located on the
same node/card. This restriction arises mainly due to use of unix
domain sockets.
Can we achieve the above use case if the underlying IPC is changed to
TCP instead of unix sockets? What other issues do we need to address
to have this working?
Regards,
Shridhar
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
