Re: LVS and RedHat Cluster Suite differences

To: " users mailing list." <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: LVS and RedHat Cluster Suite differences
From: "Ben Hollingsworth" <ben.hollingsworth@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 09:42:56 -0500
Subhankar Sengupta wrote:
  using heartbeat it is very much possible to set up active/active cluster what
  you need is GFS. LVS is a diffren thing it is releated to load balancing using
  Subho Sengupta(Black Pigeon)

Ben Hollingsworth <ben.hollingsworth@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
My company, whose Linux flavor of choice is RHEL, will be setting up a load balanced cluster soon. I've setup a couple HA servers using older versions of heartbeat, but I've never messed with LVS for an active/active cluster. What, if anything, is the difference between stock LVS and RedHat Cluster Suite? I'm assuming that RHCS is based on LVS. Have they added anything, or did they merely slap their own name on it and start charging extra for support? Anybody out there got any first-hand experience with both LVS & RHCS? Any input would be greatly appreciated.

Yes, I know what HA and LVS do. LVS is what I want. I'm familiar with HA, but I don't know enough about LVS to know if RedHat Cluster Suite adds anything to it, or is simply re-branded.

And I do know enough about LVS to know that GFS is not required, depending on what apps you're clustering.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any
attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
and may contain confidential and privileged information.  Any
unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies
of the original message.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>