[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-ha
Subject:    Re: [Linux-HA] Antw: Re:  The Heartbeat of learning
From:       Arnold Krille <arnold () arnoldarts ! de>
Date:       2013-10-17 19:40:08
Message-ID: 20131017214008.735e11bd () orinoco
[Download RAW message or body]

Am Thu, 17 Oct 2013 10:25:01 -0400 schrieb Digimer <lists@alteeve.ca>:
> On 17/10/13 03:08, Ulrich Windl wrote:
> > Nice explanation! I have one question: With multiple rings, is
> > Corosync expecting the tokens to rotate with the same speed? I'm
> > thinking of a scenario where both rings operate with different
> > speeds, so the token will rotate at the same speed at low or medium
> > network load, but might rotate with different speeds when the
> > slower ring uses the full bandwidth. I have the impression that
> > Corosync makes one of the rings as faulty (for less than one
> > second), then.
> I am not a dev, so I might not understand your question properly.
> However, as I understand it, corosync uses one ring or the other. So
> if a ring is considered faulty, it switches over to the other ring.
> How this is determined, I do not know, though I suspect it's similar
> to how node failure occurs.

I am not a dev. But I have successfully used corosync with two
communication rings. And like when bonding interfaces, you can select
how the (two) rings are considered: failover and active. With failover
it takes some time to realize that one ring is down and the other has
to be used. With active mode all rings are used at the same time and
when a node is reachable by only one of the rings, the ring is
considered faulty. But as long as another ring is up, all is well...

Have fun,

Arnold
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]