Linux - Server This forum is for the discussion of Linux Software used in a server related context. |
Notices |
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Are you new to LinuxQuestions.org? Visit the following links:
Site Howto |
Site FAQ |
Sitemap |
Register Now
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
|
|
02-09-2011, 12:10 PM
|
#1
|
Senior Member
Registered: Aug 2006
Location: Detroit, MI
Distribution: GNU/Linux systemd
Posts: 4,278
|
How do I build a 2 node failover nfs cluster?
I am using Centos. I have read places that you can use Drbd + heartbeat + nfs to make a simple failover NFS server.
I can't find any document that works though. I've tried 20 or so, including some Debian ones.
So, does anyone have any other ideas of how to do this? Point me in the right direction please.
I want 2 nodes. One to be actively serving an NFS share. The other to be ready for failover. If the first one goes out, the second takes over. Meaning, the filesystem is in sync, the IP must change, and NFS must come up.
How should I do this?
|
|
|
02-09-2011, 07:49 PM
|
#2
|
Member
Registered: Feb 2008
Location: Texas
Distribution: Fedora, RHEL, CentOS
Posts: 488
Rep:
|
|
|
1 members found this post helpful.
|
02-09-2011, 08:00 PM
|
#3
|
Senior Member
Registered: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,790
|
I posted a response on a similar thread a while back, it may fit your needs
cheers
|
|
1 members found this post helpful.
|
02-10-2011, 10:03 AM
|
#4
|
Senior Member
Registered: Aug 2006
Location: Detroit, MI
Distribution: GNU/Linux systemd
Posts: 4,278
Original Poster
|
Thanks. But these links to not complete the whole setup. In red-hats guide, they simply skip over the installation of the OS, configuration of each node and so on.
Last edited by szboardstretcher; 02-10-2011 at 02:07 PM.
|
|
|
02-10-2011, 02:10 PM
|
#5
|
Senior Member
Registered: Aug 2006
Location: Detroit, MI
Distribution: GNU/Linux systemd
Posts: 4,278
Original Poster
|
I guess the main thing I am getting stuck on, is that the RedHat guide wants a single drive shared among the nodes.
This is not what I am looking for.
I would like Node1 to have NFS and a filesystem, and if it fails, I would like it to bring up Node2's NFS and sync'ed filesystem.
Is this something that can be accomplished with Red Hat Clustering?
|
|
|
02-10-2011, 05:24 PM
|
#6
|
Senior Member
Registered: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,790
|
No .. RHCS uses a clustered filesystem (GFS/2) .. what you're trying to do has potential data loss, is this acceptable ?
|
|
|
02-14-2011, 12:16 PM
|
#7
|
Senior Member
Registered: Aug 2006
Location: Detroit, MI
Distribution: GNU/Linux systemd
Posts: 4,278
Original Poster
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbp
No .. RHCS uses a clustered filesystem (GFS/2) .. what you're trying to do has potential data loss, is this acceptable ?
|
No.
Could you give me a high-level view of what would be needed in my case?
|
|
|
02-14-2011, 04:36 PM
|
#8
|
Senior Member
Registered: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,790
|
To meet your requirements you'd need a cluster IP (provided by keepalived or something similar) and maybe an rsync running every minute to keep the content synchronised. A cluster built this way is really not a good solution ... shared storage is highly recommended.
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:34 PM.
|
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
|
Latest Threads
LQ News
|
|