3 ms·
Was that doing a primary/secondary model where the primary wrote a timestamp to the shared disk and if the secondary didn't see that after X seconds, it would t
by quercusa 3y ago
Was that doing a primary/secondary model where the primary wrote a timestamp to the shared disk and if the secondary didn't see that after X seconds, it would take over?
- nikau 3y agoI think it was a Microsoft feature but you had to have certified hardware for support. There were 2 windows servers both plugged into the same scsi disk pack, and it used a couple of crossover cables I believe for the heartbeat. I remember the unix guys were ribbing the windows guy a bit who confessed he regretted pushing for the cluster as it was so unreliable. It was the typical windows experience of the time with a management console that just hung when doing operations.
- Sylamore 3y agoOld versions of NT4 and 2000 supported SCSI disks in the cluster. We had one for a "high availability" file server from Compaq and always regretted it - I'm pretty sure a single box would have been more reliable. There was a cross-over LAN cable between the boxes and there were SCSI heartbeats (using persistent reservations IIRC) over the SCSI bus, but we would almost always have an issue with the SCSI drives deadlocking and the cluster failing BOTH nodes due to a fight over disk ownership. We replaced it with a netapp NAS eventually.