I haven't used ha-lvm, but it doesn't seem to be overkill for your needs. It looks tailored to your needs, in fact. The kb says that ha-lvm is for failover volumes, those that will only be mounted on one host (http://kbase.redhat.com/faq/docs/DOC-3068). So you don't need to complicate things with a clustered file system. On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:36 AM, urgrue <urgrue@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello, > I need to set up a simple failover scenario. The idea is to have two > independent RHEL 5 systems on local disks, connected to a shared SAN. > The application is all on the SAN. Only one node is ever running at a > time. If the active node fails, the disk needs to be mounted on the > passive node and the application started. > Failover doesn't have to be fast or automatic, but it has to be simple > and reliable. > Depending on where I look, HA-LVM is sometimes recommended and other > times it's CLVM. Looking at red hat cluster it seems HA-LVM is a bit > overkill for my needs. > Any suggestions or other options? > > -- > redhat-list mailing list > unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list > -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
