Re: [Xen-users] remus vs. pacemaker/drbd?

[Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Greg Woods wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 09:28 -0600, Nick Couchman wrote:
>    
> > Pacemaker/DRBD, on the other hand, just synchronizes the data,
> > and if it detects that one of the domUs has died, starts it up somewhere else.
> >   So, with Remus, the theory/goal is 0 downtime of your domU, whereas Pacemaker
> > simply minimizes downtime to a certain point - the time it takes to detect 
> > failure
> >   and boot the new domU.
> >      
> Actually, pacemaker can do live migrations with some limitations. If the
>
> I have no experience with Remus, but from Nick's description of it, it
> sounds like Remus might be a whole lot easier to set up and may be a
> good way to go if all you care about is failover for your domU's, or if
> you really need instantaneous failover in the event of a server crash.
>    
All of this is well and good, but not to the point.

I'm using pacemaker and DRBD.  It works.  it's just a pain.

Has anybody on this list actually used Remus in production?  Is it ready 
for prime time?  Or is it still beta (or alpha)?
Miles

--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In<fnord>  practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra



_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users