Workload Automation

Expand all | Collapse all

Cluster vs. Primary + Shadow scheduler?

Jump to Best Answer
  • 1.  Cluster vs. Primary + Shadow scheduler?

    Posted 08-01-2018 08:56 AM

    The WAAE 11.3.6 installation guide suggests that if you want high availability for your WAAE scheduler, then using a  clustered server is the better option to setting up a  Primary + Shadow scheduler configuration.
    We are setting up a new R11.3.6 scheduling environment (under RHEL 7.3) and require maximum availability for the scheduler. We only have experience of using a Primary and Shadow scheduler configuration and this has worked well for us. However since we are setting up a new environment we want to consider all options.
    So in view of this, what are people's opinions of the best configuration to use for high availability scheduler?

    Do people agree that installing a WAAE scheduler on a clustered server *is* the better than setting up a  configuration? If so why?

    What are the pro's and con's of each option?

    Thanks.



  • 2.  Re: Cluster vs. Primary + Shadow scheduler?
    Best Answer

    Posted 08-11-2018 10:12 PM

    With a cluster-managed highly available environment, the automatic failback feature can't be leveraged. However the cluster management software might have an equivalent feature. Similarly, in a cluster managed environment, the sendevent CLI can't be used to failover manually.



  • 3.  Re: Cluster vs. Primary + Shadow scheduler?

    Posted 09-01-2018 10:39 PM

    Hi James,

     

    Have you been able to decide on the WAAE-Native-HA Vs Cluster-managed-HA? Please share points that influenced the decision, if you can, for the benefit of other Community members.

     

    Thanks,

    Chandru