[hobbit] dr for hobbit

[Iain Miller]

Hi Phil,

I know you said you don't want to use a HA/clustering solution, but I
have a similar situation to yourself and I use a HA solution with
heartbeat/drbd and being honest it saves me a load of hassle.  OK the
failover fails automatically and I don't know that it has (which I'd
argue is how I want it) but all the rrd files are kept in sync and all
maintenance settings get maintained across the two servers.  Plus I
don't need to recall which server was down and which server I need to
rsync from and to - DRBD resource maintains all that for me and I just
worry about configuring hobbit.  Plus as hobbit is only running on the
active server, it's the only one sending out alerts.

I can give you more details on my configuration if you are interested.

Cheers,

Iain.

2008/5/19 Phil Wild <philwild at gmail.com>:
> Hi all,
>
> I am redesigning the method we use for performing a failover to a disaster
> recovery installation of hobbit. I am interested in opinions on the approach
> and any shortcomings.
>
> Note: This is not HA/clustering, it is for DR purposes.
>
> We are aiming to have:
>
> a production hobbit deployment
> a DR hobbit deployment
>
> clients will be configured to send metrics to both servers. which will keep
> historical rrd data up to date etc.
>
> The production server will be configured to send out alerts. The dr server
> will not.
>
> At regular intervals, rsync will be used to synchronise data from the
> production server to the dr server, including the in memory checkpoint file.
>
> In the event of a dr, the dr hobbit server will be promoted to active by
> restarting hobbit, and loading the checkpoint and alert configurations.
>
> I am expecting that this will ensure that the dr server will be "up to date"
> with proudction as per the last checkpoint. This includes tests that have
> been disabled or acknowledged.
>
> Prior to failback to the production hobbit installation, the reverse of the
> above would be performed.
> An rsync of rrd data files would be performed to cover any windows where one
> of the servers was offline for a period of time.
>
> Is there anything wrong with this approach?
>
> Cheers
>
> Phil
>
>
> --
> Tel: 0400 466 952
> Fax: 0433 123 226
> email: philwild AT gmail.com



-- 
Iain Miller
iainonthemove at gmail.com