Another alternative is for the failure of one component to still allow bringing

Another alternative is for the failure of one

This preview shows page 382 - 386 out of 452 pages.

know a failure occurred. Another alternative is for the failure of one component to still allow bringing down the other components cleanly. If a database SQL server fails, the database should still be able to be brought down cleanly so that no database recovery is necessary. The worse case is for a failure of one component to cause the entire system to fail. If one component fails and all other components need to be restarted, the downtime will be high. Be Able to Monitor Applications All components in a system, including applications, should be able to be monitored for their health. A monitor might be as simple as a display command or as complicated as a SQL query. There must be a way to
Image of page 382
Designing Highly Available Cluster Applications Handling Application Failures Appendix C 383 ensure that the application is behaving correctly. If the application fails and it is not detected automatically, it might take hours for a user to determine the cause of the downtime and recover from it.
Image of page 383
Designing Highly Available Cluster Applications Minimizing Planned Downtime Appendix C 384 Minimizing Planned Downtime Planned downtime (as opposed to unplanned downtime) is scheduled; examples include backups, systems upgrades to new operating system revisions, or hardware replacements. For planned downtime, application designers should consider: Reducing the time needed for application upgrades/patches . Can an administrator install a new version of the application without scheduling downtime? Can different revisions of an application operate within a system? Can different revisions of a client and server operate within a system? Providing for online application reconfiguration . Can the configuration information used by the application be changed without bringing down the application? Documenting maintenance operations . Does an operator know how to handle maintenance operations? When discussing highly available systems, unplanned failures are often the main point of discussion. However, if it takes 2 weeks to upgrade a system to a new revision of software, there are bound to be a large number of complaints. The following sections discuss ways of handling the different types of planned downtime. Reducing Time Needed for Application Upgrades and Patches Once a year or so, a new revision of an application is released. How long does it take for the end-user to upgrade to this new revision? This answer is the amount of planned downtime a user must take to upgrade their application. The following guidelines reduce this time.
Image of page 384
Designing Highly Available Cluster Applications Minimizing Planned Downtime Appendix C 385 Provide for Rolling Upgrades Provide for a “rolling upgrade” in a client/server environment. For a system with many components, the typical scenario is to bring down the entire system, upgrade every node to the new version of the software, and then restart the application on all the affected nodes. For large systems, this could result in a long downtime.
Image of page 385
Image of page 386

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 452 pages?

  • Fall '15
  • ilir
  • Logical volume management, Veritas Volume Manager, Serviceguard Manager, Serviceguard, Cluster Lock

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture