Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 02:28:56 +0800 From: "Derek Barrett" <derekbarrett@graffiti.net> To: <sporner@nentec.de>, <freebsd-cluster@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Application cluster Message-ID: <20020619182856.30992.qmail@graffiti.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Glad to see you are enthusiatic about this, and it looks like you have some possible help too. One of the weaknesses of the freebsd community as I have seen, and some of the guys who left the core have commented on, is that the community seems to spend MORE time on debating theory and shooting each other down rathar than actually going out and prototyping something. I mean there have been some really great ideas that in theory probably sounded foolish, but somebody went out and didn't listen to the naysayers and did the work anyway and got the work done. I mean look at Google. Those guys started their engine right in the middle of the dot com peak. There were far more companies out there with way more resources and alot more branding power, but those 2 stuck with it and now Google has become the standard for search engines. I didn't even start using it until late last year, and like many other people, it has mad everything else obsolete. Anyway enough of the aside! I am going to contact the owner of a freebsd related site and see if he's willing to host your source. If not, I know it sounds a little cheesy, but my Graffiti.net account also has 20MB of HTTP storage, I'll have to check the bandwidth, but I'm sure it's more than enough to accomodate many downloads. It's not spartan, like Geocities or anything, they are pretty generous with resources. I'll let you know! Derek ----- Original Message ----- From: Andy Sporner <sporner@nentec.de> Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 10:59:26 +0200 To: Derek Barrett <derekbarrett@graffiti.net>, freebsd-cluster <freebsd-cluster@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Application cluster > Hi Derek, > > >hahahahaha well as a fellow American then I should > >have replied, "Thanks partner! USA!" > > > Well I am relieved to see that this is still something that > exists! Today I just left the main FreeBSD hackers list > because I found it to be just a margin too cut-throat. These > days with what little time I have the last thing I want is > not to be taken seriously. I regard email as a primary > communications method and for some to just pretend > the mail never got there is hard to tolerate (especially > when I send it directly to the individual--2-3 times). > I have the feeling that people are too childish to face > things directly. Which is one of the reasons I am working > here--better environment. -- but enough flaming for > the moment ;-) > > > > >I don't think you should dismiss your scripts that > >"only start and stop" as being laughable. To me, > >that's 75% of the battle. I know I've spent hours > >at times just getting my startup scripts to work > >properly, missing a switch here or there, the trial > >and error involved in that is alot sometimes. And > >getting a RELIABLE method of monitoring the other > >servers has still been a challenge for everyone. > > > Thanks for your complement... > > > > >Truly, getting a failover > >server to successfully take over means: > > > >1) Reduced late night phone calls > >2) Not having to make as many late night phone calls :-D > > > > I used to work at Hyatt's central computer division in > Chicago and I had many times "pager duty" and, yes I > can sympathize with you! > > > > >And most of these types > >of scripts depend on having a second network card > >and a serial cable as well. The Linux HA > >servers even have a controlling server for the entire > >cluster called a Director. That your mechanism goes > >across a network card is nice, the less overhead, the better. > > > I allow the configuration of network addresses for each > node. A heartbeat message is sent out over any and all > links that are present for the server. The whole thing with > the serial cable seems rather archeaic. I mean if the > networking layer has failed, the server is probably not > that usefull anyways! > > > > >I mean, a couple thousand dollar hardware failover solution > >is nice, but so would a Ferrari as a company car. I recently worked > >in a high uptime enviornment, and every single server there had > >an identical backup, run by a hardware failover switch, and > >let me tell you, I got really SPOILED. The amount of > >stress relief that those failover switches provided made troubleshooting > >and maintenance a breeze. > > > Funny thing, I worked for about 5 years with Sequent clusters and in > their earlier versions (< 2.0) the stand-alone machine was more reliable > that the same machine in a cluster. At that time they really never got > more > than 2 nodes working right. That was why I started with 3 nodes in the > beginning > as it changes the dynamics remarkably and these same dynamics work very > well on 2 nodes too. > > > > > > >Let me see what I can come up with for a place for you to post your file. > > > Meanwhile I need to dust off the work I was doing (I had modularized it with > DSO support and added some process statis collecting so that you can > from one > point monitor processes on any node of the cluster). I also improved > the build > environment--it was previously very rickety. > > Andy > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-cluster" in the body of the message > > -- _______________________________________________ Get your free email from http://www.graffiti.net Powered by Outblaze To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-cluster" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020619182856.30992.qmail>