Search Results

Search found 463 results on 19 pages for 'clustering'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 4/19 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • MPICH2 vs KERRYGHED

    - by user311906
    Hi All right now I am moving first steps in clustering. I installed MPICH2 on my Ubuntu at home and I have a silly question about it. For what I am reading right now it seems that it provides the capability of sending processes to other pcs. I went for this lib just because I set it up very quickly and easily. Compared to MPICH2 , do you know what is the advantage of having a different clustering system like KERRYGHED? It seems that these ones also provide this capability, but the Kernel must be rebuild, so I suppose that it is going to be faster. What other advantages are remarkable for a clustering system like this? Thanks

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2008 Cluster Installation - First network name always fails

    - by boflynn
    I'm testing failover clustering in Windows Server 2008 to host a SQL Server 2008 installation using this installation guide. My base cluster is installed and working properly, as well as clustering the DTC service. However, when it comes time to install SQL Server, my first attempt at installation always fails with the same message and seems to "taint" the network name. For example, with my previous cluster attempt, I was installing SQL Server as VSQL. After approximately 15 attempts of installation and trying to resolve the errors, e.g. changing domain accounts for SQL, setting SPNs, etc., I typoed the network name as VQSL and the installation worked. Similarly on my current cluster, I tried installing with the SQL service named PROD-C1-DB and got the same errors as last time until I tried changing the name to anything else, e.g. PROD-C1-DB1, SQL, TEST, etc., at which point the install works. It will even install to VSQL now. While testing, my install routine was: Run setup.exe from patched media, selecting appropriate options After the install fails, I'd chose "Remove node from a SQL Server failover cluster" and remove the single, failed, node Attempt to diagnose problem, inspect event logs, etc. Delete the computer account that was created for the SQL Service from Active Directory Delete the MSSQL10.MSSQLSERVER folder from the shared data drive The error message I receive from the SQL Server installer is: The following error has occurred: The cluster resource 'SQL Server' could not be brought online. Error: The group or resource is not in the correct state to perform the requested operation. (Exception from HRESULT: 0x8007139F) Along with hundreds of the following errors in the Application event log: [sqsrvres] checkODBCConnectError: sqlstate = 28000; native error = 4818; message = [Microsoft][SQL Server Native Client 10.0][SQL Server]Login failed for user 'NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON'. System configuration notes: Windows Server 2008 Enterprise Edition x64 SQL Server 2008 Enterprise Edition x64 using slipstreamed SP1+CU1 media Dell PowerEdge servers Fibre attached storage

    Read the article

  • Hyper-V File Server Clustering - at my wit’s end

    - by René Kåbis
    I am at my wit’s end with File Server clustering under Hyper-V. I am hoping that someone might be able to help me figure out this Gordian Knot of a technology that seems to have dead ends (like forcing cluster VMs to use iSCSI drives where normally-attached VHDX drives could suffice) where logic and reason would normally provide a logical solution. My hardware: I will be running three servers (in the end), but right now everything is taking place on one server. One of the secondary servers will exist purely as a witness/quorum, and another slightly more powerful one will be acting as an emergency backup (with additional storage, just not redundant) to hold the secondary AD VM and the other halves of a set of clustered VMs: the SQL VM and the file system VM. Please note, these each are the depreciated nodes of a cluster, the main nodes will be on the most powerful first machine. My heavy lifter is a machine that also contains all of the truly redundant storage on the network. If this gives anyone the heebie-geebies, too bad. It has a 6TB (usable) RAID-10 array, and will (in the end) hold the primary nodes of both aforementioned clusters, but is right now holding all VMs. This is, right now: DC01, DC02, SQL01, SQL02, FS01 & FS02. Eventually, I will be adding additional VMs to handle Exchange, Sharepoint and Lync, but only to this main server (the secondary server won't be able to handle more than three or four VMs, so why burden it? The AD, SQL & FS VMs are the most critical for the business). If anyone is now saying, “wait, what about a SAN or a NAS for the file servers?”, well too bad. What exists on the main machine is what I have to deal with. I followed these instructions, but I seem to be unable to get things to work. In order to make the file server truly redundant, I cannot trust any one machine to hold the only data store on the network. Therefore, I have created a set of iSCSI drives on the VM-host of the main machine, and attached one to each file server VM. The end result is that I want my FS01 to sit on the heavy lifter, along with its iSCSI “drive”, and FS02 will sit on the secondary machine with its own iSCSI “drive” there as well. That is, neither iSCSI drive will end up sitting on the same machine as the other. As such, the clustered FS will utterly duplicate the contents of the iSCSI drives between each other, so that if one physical machine (or the FS VM) goes toes-up, the other has got a full copy of the data on its own iSCSI drive. My problem occurs when I try to apply the file server role within the failover cluster manager. Actually, it is even before that -- it occurs when adding the disks. Since I have added each disk preferentially to a specific VM (by limiting the initiator by DNS hostname, and by adding two-way CHAP authentication), this forces each VM to be in control of its own iSCSI disk. However, when I try to add the disks to the Disks section of Storage within Failover Cluster Manager, the entire process fails for a random disk of the pair. That is, one will get online, but the other will remain offline because it does not have the correct “owner node”. I mean, really -- WTF? Of course it doesn’t have the right owner node, both drives are showing the same node name!! I cannot seem to have one drive show up with one node name as owner, and the other drive show up with the other node name as owner. And because both drives are not “online”, I cannot create a pool to apply to a cluster role. Talk about getting stuck between a rock and a hard place! I’ve got more to add, but my work is closing for the day and I have to wrap things up. I will try to add more tomorrow morning when I get in. My main objective is to have a file server VM on each machine, the storage on each machine, but a transparent failover in case one physical machine fails. Essentially, a failover FS that doesn’t care which machine fails -- the storage contents are replicated equally on each machine. Am I even heading in the right direction?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2008 Cluster Installation - First network name always fails

    - by boflynn
    I'm testing failover clustering in Windows Server 2008 to host a SQL Server 2008 installation using this installation guide. My base cluster is installed and working properly, as well as clustering the DTC service. However, when it comes time to install SQL Server, my first attempt at installation always fails with the same message and seems to "taint" the network name. For example, with my previous cluster attempt, I was installing SQL Server as VSQL. After approximately 15 attempts of installation and trying to resolve the errors, e.g. changing domain accounts for SQL, setting SPNs, etc., I typoed the network name as VQSL and the installation worked. Similarly on my current cluster, I tried installing with the SQL service named PROD-C1-DB and got the same errors as last time until I tried changing the name to anything else, e.g. PROD-C1-DB1, SQL, TEST, etc., at which point the install works. It will even install to VSQL now. While testing, my install routine was: Run setup.exe from patched media, selecting appropriate options After the install fails, I'd chose "Remove node from a SQL Server failover cluster" and remove the single, failed, node Attempt to diagnose problem, inspect event logs, etc. Delete the computer account that was created for the SQL Service from Active Directory Delete the MSSQL10.MSSQLSERVER folder from the shared data drive The error message I receive from the SQL Server installer is: The following error has occurred: The cluster resource 'SQL Server' could not be brought online. Error: The group or resource is not in the correct state to perform the requested operation. (Exception from HRESULT: 0x8007139F) Along with hundreds of the following errors in the Application event log: [sqsrvres] checkODBCConnectError: sqlstate = 28000; native error = 4818; message = [Microsoft][SQL Server Native Client 10.0][SQL Server]Login failed for user 'NT AUTHORITY\ANONYMOUS LOGON'. System configuration notes: Windows Server 2008 Enterprise Edition x64 SQL Server 2008 Enterprise Edition x64 using slipstreamed SP1+CU1 media Dell PowerEdge servers Fibre attached storage

    Read the article

  • What is the best way to create a failover cluster for my IIS website?

    - by ObligatoryMoniker
    Our eCommerce website www.tervis.com currently runs on two servers: SQL server: 2005 x 86 on Windows Server 2003 Standard x86 with a single dual core processor and 4 gb of memeory IIS server: Windows Server 2008 Web edition x64 with dual quad core hyper threaded processors and 32 gb of memory Tervis.com's revenue has steadily grown to the point where we need to have redundant servers deployed with a fail over mechanism so that we do not have any down time. Because the SQL server is so underpowered compared to the web server my thought was to purchase: 2 x SQL Server 2008 R2 web edition x64 single processor license 2 x Windows Server 2008 R2 Web Edition Licenses 1 x New Physical dual quad core 32 GB server 1 x F5 Load Balancer I need the Windows Server 2008 R2 Web Edition licenses so that I can run SQL and IIS on the same box for both of these servers. The thought is to run this as an active/passive fail over cluster that could be upgraded to an active/active cluster if we purchased the additional SQL licensing. The F5 load balancer would serve as the device that monitors the two servers and if the current active one stops responding then fails over to using the other server. To be clear this is not windows clustering but simply using a load balancer to fail over between two computers so that you now have a cluster in the general sense. Is this really the best way to accomplish what I need? Is there some way to leverage the old server 2003 SQL server to function as the devices that funnels http requests to the appropriate active server and then fails over if a problem occurs? Is there any third party clustering software that might help me accomplish this in a simpler fashion?

    Read the article

  • High availability virtual machines

    - by Jeremy
    I've been reading a lot about high availability virtualization, either via Hyper-V or VMWare. In that context, essentially high availabliity means that the VM is hosted by a closter of physical servers (nodes), so if one of the physical servers goes down, the VM can still be served by other physical servers. So far so good, the physical cluster and the VM itself are highly available. However if the service being provided, let's say SQL server, MSDTC, or any other service, are actually being provided by the VM image and the virtualized operating system. So I imagine that there is still a point of failure at the virtual layer that isn't accounted for. Something could happen within the virtual machine itself that the physican cluster can not account for, correct? In that instance the physican failover cluster (Hyper-V) or VMWare host, can not fail over, because the issue is not with one of the servers in the physical cluster - failing over a physical node would not do any good. Does this necessitate building a virtual failover cluster on top of the physical one, or is this not necessary? Alternatively, I suppose you could skip the phsyical clustering, and just cluster at the virtual layer (Child based failover clustering), because that should still survive a physical failure. See image below showing parent based (left), child based (right) and a combination (center). Is parent based as far as you need to go, or is child based more appropriate?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server: Clustering by timestamp; pros/cons

    - by Ian Boyd
    I have a table in SQL Server, where i want inserts to be added to the end of the table (as opposed to a clustering key that would cause them to be inserted in the middle). This means I want the table clustered by some column that will constantly increase. This could be achieved by clustering on a datetime column: CREATE TABLE Things ( ... CreatedDate datetime DEFAULT getdate(), [timestamp] timestamp, CONSTRAINT [IX_Things] UNIQUE CLUSTERED (CreatedDate) ) But I can't guaranteed that two Things won't have the same time. So my requirements can't really be achieved by a datetime column. I could add a dummy identity int column, and cluster on that: CREATE TABLE Things ( ... RowID int IDENTITY(1,1), [timestamp] timestamp, CONSTRAINT [IX_Things] UNIQUE CLUSTERED (RowID) ) But you'll notice that my table already constains a timestamp column; a column which is guaranteed to be a monotonically increasing. This is exactly the characteristic I want for a candidate cluster key. So I cluster the table on the rowversion (aka timestamp) column: CREATE TABLE Things ( ... [timestamp] timestamp, CONSTRAINT [IX_Things] UNIQUE CLUSTERED (timestamp) ) Rather than adding a dummy identity int column (RowID) to ensure an order, I use what I already have. What I'm looking for are thoughts of why this is a bad idea; and what other ideas are better. Note: Community wiki, since the answers are subjective.

    Read the article

  • How do you manage private queue permissions on a windows server 2008 cluster?

    - by David
    On windows server 2003 there was an option to allow a resource to interact with the desktop, this allowed you to run computer management mmc snap-in on the virtual name of the cluster, allowing you to manage permissions of the private message queues on the cluster. Windows Server 2008 failover clustering has removed that checkbox, so applications can no longer interact with the desktop. My question is then how does one go about managing private queue permissions on the clustered (the virtual name) server?

    Read the article

  • Alternatives for load balancing Tomcat webapp?

    - by Mahriman
    We wish to enable some form of load balancing for a Tomcat webapp we're currently using today. Unfortunately, I know almost to nothing about Tomcat load balancing, clustering and so on. Can anyone share resources that cover the different alternatives, give some handy pointers (maybe some solutions work better in certain types of environment?) or just some tips on solutions to try out? We're currently running Tomcat 5.5 if that makes any difference in features, however no critical obstacles for upgrading to 6.

    Read the article

  • Tab Sweep: CDI Tutorial, Vertical Clustering, Monitoring, Vorpal, SPARC T4, ...

    - by arungupta
    Recent Tips and News on Java, Java EE 6, GlassFish & more : • Tutorial - Introduction to CDI - Contexts and Dependency Injection for Java EE (JSR 299) (Mark Struberg, Peter Muir) • Clustering with Glassfish 3.1 (Javing) • Two Way Communication in JMS (Lukasz Budnik) • Glassfish – Vertical clustering with multiple domains (Alexandru Ersenie) • Setting up Glassfish Monitoring – handling connection problems (Jacek Milewski) • Screencast: Developing Discoverable XMPP Components with Vorpal (Chuk Munn Lee) • Java EE Application Servers, SPARC T4, Solaris Containers, and Resource Pools (Jeff Taylor)

    Read the article

  • Creating Emulated iSCSI Target in a Lab/Testing Environment using Windows Server 2008 R2

    - by Brian McCleary
    We have a single server running Windows Server 2008 with Hyper-V installed running 5 virtual machines. I have purchased a second DELL R805 Server so that we can create a fail-over cluster to our current R805 that is currently in production. Right now, our R805 connects via iSCSI to a MD3000i iSCSI SAN. Before we try to roll out the second server and clustering to our production environment, I want to be able to test and "play with" the clustering features in our lab before rolling it out. The problem is that I don't want to spend a couple thousand dollars on another iSCSI SAN server just for testing. I already have two servers in my lab that are installed with Windows Server 2008 R2 64bit (one is the R805 and another spare desktop that was laying around) and with the Hyper-V roll enabled that should be ready to test with, but I don't have an iSCSI target to use as the Cluster Shared Volume. Is there anyway to install, either on a Hyper-V image or on a external spare computer that we have some sort of emulated iSCSI target? In our lab, we obviously don't need a real SAN, just something that we can test out how to setup the clustering properly outside of our production environment. Any advise is appreciated. FYI - I have read Jose Barret's blog on WUDSS at http://blogs.technet.com/josebda/archive/2008/01/07/installing-the-evaluation-version-of-wudss-2003-refresh-and-the-microsoft-iscsi-software-target-version-3-1-on-a-vm.aspx, but it seems awfully complex. I'm hoping for an easier solution.

    Read the article

  • Cant turn off Redirected Access on Cluster Shared Volumes 2008r2 Failover clustering

    - by 562networks
    I read up on LH Mode and am still boggled what it is and what it does. I pass all validation on the Failover cluster wizard but in the Event Viewer I get erros for Event ID 5121 and 1034 related to one of the disks that is in the CSV for my hyper v machines. We have two disks in the CSV for our hyper V farm. Everything seems to work just fine but im worried about the even viewer errors. I have also read that people are having problems like I turning off Redirected access.

    Read the article

  • I need advice about iscsi + zfs(or ntfs) + windows 2008 clustering

    - by Fatih
    I want to setup a storage farm with iSCSI. I have 2 cluster node machine, 1 iscsi target machine that has 8TB installed as RAID 10. The capacity is now 8TB, but I'll upgrade the capacity in future. Let's say, I installed clusters as file server, and I connected these servers to iscsi target, then I shared 8TB capacity as an only folder to the windows users. Users now see only a folder whose capacity is 8TB. But if I want to add another 8TB to expand the main capacity, the users must not see the second folder for this new 8 TB. The users must see only a folder as before, but this time this folder's capacity expanded to 16TB. And so on, if I add another 8TB, the users must deal with only a folder. For this purpose, I've learnt that ZFS can expand its size without a problem. So if I use ZFS as a file system on iSCSI luns, how can the cluster machines see the ZFS. Because the cluster machines have windows 2008. Is there another way to expand the size of shared folder without a problem? Does ntfs support it?

    Read the article

  • Best option for storage clustering

    - by sam
    I'm working on an application that requires a large amount of storage space and I want to handle storage 'in-house' (Much cheaper than, say, S3) so we will have multiple servers (Initially 4) with large amounts of storage (6TB each). The storage will need to be very flexible and configurable, each piece of data should be replicated on at least 2 servers and must be easily readable/writable from ether an API of a UNIX device/file/folder like a normal drive, I don't mind which. We must also be able to easily offload content to our HTTP CDN (Edgecast), it doesn't need to have built in HTTP support but if it doesn't I'm going to have to write something to get the files onto HTTP so they can be pulled by the CDN. I've looked at a lot of solutions including Eucalyptus Walrus OpenStack Object Storage MogileFS and some others which I can't remember All the servers will be running RHEL 6, they have 4x1.5TB drives which will be RAID1'd into a single partition. All the servers have 1GB/s connections between them and 100MB/s connections to the internet with unlimited bandwidth. They have 2x2.66ghz processors. I understand there isn't a single, perfect answer but it would be nice to get some pointers.

    Read the article

  • I need Microsoft SQL Clustering/Replication/Scaling Best Practice Resources

    - by efk
    I'm trying to plan for our future scalability of our Microsoft SQL 2000/2005/2008 infrastructure. I'm having a hard time finding good information on how to best engineer such services, how to best keep these services available, and how to scale them as load increases. Can someone point me in the right direction? Books, online resources, videos, anything would be helpful.

    Read the article

  • Clustering filesystem for small files

    - by viraptor
    Hi, I'm looking for a distributed filesystem which I could use for storing lots of small files (<1MB usually). What I want to get is: 2 servers which have the fs mounted themselves and mirror the data locking support (among reachable nodes) some kind of best-effort automatic resynchronisation after one node goes down and comes back again What I mean by the resync is that, I'm ok with both servers doing read/write operations even if they split-brain. I'm also ok if a local process obtains a lock if the other host is not reachable. From the resync I expect only a file-level consistent view after a while - that is - if file x is modified on both nodes during a split-brain, I don't really care which one is available after they join again, as long as it's full file, not one block coming from node1 and another block from node2. Is there a solution like that out there? I see that gluster has some problems with file locks (even in 3.1). I also noticed that OCFS2 will panic if both nodes split-brain. What other filesystem would allow me to do what I want?

    Read the article

  • Ganglia multicast with clustering

    - by luckytaxi
    Let's say I have two hosts. One acts as the server where gmetad and a local gmond resides. It also has the web interface. I then have a client that only has gmond configure as follows. Anyways, everything works fine if i remove the mcast_join line from the udp_recv_channel If I leave it as is the UI doesn't show any hosts. I'm following the quick start guide found here In my gmond.conf file i have the following. udp_send_channel { mcast_join = host1 port = 8661 ttl = 1 } udp_recv_channel { port = 8661 retry_bind = true mcast_join = host1 bind = host1 } In my gmetad.conf file i have. data_source "Infrastructure" host1:8661 host2:8661

    Read the article

  • Apache mod_wsgi elegant clustering method

    - by Dr I
    I'm currently trying to build a scalable infrastructure for my Python webservers. Actually, I'm trying to find the most elegant way to build a scalable cluster to host all my Python WebServices. For now, I'm using three servers like this: 1 x PuppetMaster to deploy my servers. 2 x Apache Reverse Proxy Front-end servers. 1 x Apache HTTPd Server which host the Python WSGI Applications and binded to using mod_wsgi. 4 x MongoDB Clustered server. Everything is OK concerning the Reverse proxy and the DB Backend, I'm able to easily add a new Reverse Proxy and a new DB Node, but my problem is about the Python WebServer. I thinked to just provision a new node with exactly the same configuration and a rsync replication between the two nodes, but It's not really usefull in term of deployement for my developpers etc. So if you have a solution which is as efficient and elegant that the Tomcat Cluster I'll be really happy to ear it ;-)

    Read the article

  • High Availability Clustering and Virtualization

    - by tmcallaghan
    I'm trying to understand how the various virtualization vendors (specifically Amazon EC2, but also VMware and Xen) enable software vendors to provide a real HA solution in the environment where the servers are virtualized. Specifically, if I'm running any HA application (exchange, databases, etc) I need to ensure that my redundant virtual "servers" aren't located on the same physical server. Using in-house virtualization solutions (VMware, Xen, etc) I can provision accordingly as well as check the virtual - physical arrangement. I could, however, accidentally "vmotion" to the same physical hardware. With EC2, I don't even have the ability at provision time to select different physical servers. Since their Cluster Compute Instances are 1 virtual server per physical server it seems to be the only way to guarantee I don't have a false sense of redundancy. Any ideas or thoughts would be helpful. What are others doing about this problem? If the vendors provided an API where I could get something as simple as a unique physical system identifier I could at least know if I'm going to have an issue. -Tim

    Read the article

  • SQL Cluster on Hyper V Failover Cluster

    - by Chris W
    We have a VM running SQL Server on a 6 node cluster of blades. The VM's data files are stored a SAN attached using a direct iSCSI connection. As this SQL server will be running a number of important databases we're debating whether we should be clustering the SQL Server or will the fact that the VM is running in the cluster itself sufficient to give us high availability. I'm used to running SQL clusters when dealing with physical servers but I'm a bit sketchy on what is best practice when all the servers are just VMs sat on Hyper V. If a blade running the VM fails I presume the VM will be started up on another load. I'm guessing the only benefit that adding a SQL cluster to the setup will give us it that the recovery time after a failure will be a little quicker? Are there any other benefits?

    Read the article

  • Is Tomcat Shared Session / Cluster between two machine possible?

    - by Snorri
    I have a setup of several Tomcat servers distributed between a few servers, all running the same thing. Apache is on top of Apache and a loadbalancer in front of the Apache servers. I want to cluster the Tomcats using Shared Session to minimize downtime and user interruption while deploying apps. I know clustering works within the same server but is it possible to setup Tomcat in a way that it shares sessions between servers on different machines? => Server 1 ==> Apache 1 ===> Tomcat 1 => Server 2 ==> Apache 2 ===> Tomcat 2 When Server/Tomcat 1 would be taken down, users and their sessions would transfer over to Server/Tomcat 2 and vice versa.

    Read the article

  • SQLServer 2008 FailOver and Load Balancing

    - by Jedi Master Spooky
    I have a project with a 2TB database ( 450.000.000 rows). I need to provide to the proyect a solution that gives FailOver and load Balacing, what do you recommend? We are going to use a NetApp Filer for the Data Files and for the File System of the Proyect. I read that SQl Clustering does not provide load balacing. If I cannnot have this feature and I have to go only to the FailOver what Server ( I presume that the key feature here is memory) would you recomend. We are adding 1.000.000 rows a day. Once the rows is inserted we are doing a lot of updates to that row for about 1 week then the row get static. Because of this I am thinking in some kind of history table or database or something like that. I am open to the Os servers implementation, I was thinking of a windows 2008 server with cluster but this depend of the database solution

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >