On Wed, 2003-09-17 at 19:18, KANTHARIA, CHIRAG RAMESHCHANDRA (HP) wrote:
> Aneesh Kumar K.V sez:
> | keepalive -> is the high available component of openSSI project.
> | keepalived is an implementationof VRRP protocol that also makes LVS
> | available ( This need to be downloaded from keepalived.org ) .
> So, are you saying that both are unrelated, or is it like LVS (ie. the
> LVS infrastructure is there in SSI, but one requires userspace tools
> from LVS website)?
Both are unrelated. For LVS the high available part is implemented by
1) ha-lvs . This is a part of openSSI
2) keepalived ( downloaded from http://www.keepalived.org ).
In the case of keepalived automatic port binding is not done. IF you
look at the keepalived configuration the services that need to
clusterwide will be specified in the keepalived configuration file. We
have made changes to keepalived so that it uses CI for finding out
whether a real server is alive or not. If any of the real server node
goes down CI will notify the keepalived daemon and keepalived will
remove the service from the director node.
One advantage of keepalived is that we can associate priority to the
director node. That means when a high priority director node joins the
cluster it will take over the job of director.
But keepalived doesn't help in bringing the transparent clusterwide IP
functionality implemented by ha-lvs.
> | If you are looking for configuring LVS I would say go for ha-lvs
> | configuration as specified in docs/README.ipvs.
> I think, we should also include ipvsadm in the RPMs that we build for
> SSI. IIRC, there were some mails regarding removing ipvsadm
> altogether. Is it going away?
We don't modify the ipvsadm packages in any sense. So I am not sure
whether we need to distribute one along with openSSI pacakges.
BTW we should be removing the ipvsadm dependency on openSSI. It is
basically not happening because of lack of time from my side.