Altocumulus
AltocumulusM_Saeedthis is allready configured and works. Sorry i didnt mention it.
The Problem is if the active part of the HA-Cluster lost the connection to the primary node, and the passive part doesnt, after a failover, the primary node is automaticly active again.
I have drawn a little picture, i hope this makes more clear what my problem is.
PSFletchTheTeki think thats not part of my problem.
Cirrusmwi
Let's assume you would seperate both into two different pools and we would conditionallay govern this via an iRule.
when CLIENT_ACCEPTED {
set default_x_pool [LB::server pool]
if {[active_members $default_pool] < 1}{
pool Service_backup_y_pool
}
}
AltocumulusM_Saeedgood idea, but the primary node would be active on the second HA-Cluster member.
Did you see the Picture?
MVPmwi Can you take a moment to explain the situation in a different way because I am not understanding what you mean even after looking at your diagram.
Altocumulusi can try.
We have a HA-Cluster with two F5 Loadbalancer (LB1 and LB2), on this cluster is an pool with two nodes (primary and secondary), primary node hast configured manual resume, secondary not.
This all works as intended.
Problem is if LB1 is the active member of the cluster and lost network connection to primary node and LB2 doesent, it routes the traffic to secondary node. If now LB1 goes down (in example lost power) and LB2 is now the active clustermember, it routes traffic again to the primary node because it doesnt know that LB1 switched to the secondary node.
CirrusWe need to know whether you are handling stateful or a stateless traffic .. ex it's a database or http traffic?
Altocumulusits a Database
