# PBS Failover with Pacemaker and Corosync **URL:** \ **Category:** Developers\ **Created:** [September 22, 2020, 2:44pm UTC](https://community.openpbs.org/t/pbs-failover-with-pacemaker-and-corosync/2288 "2020-09-22T14:44:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![ashwathraop](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex030/user_avatar/community.openpbs.org/ashwathraop/32/79_2.png) [@ashwathraop](https://community.openpbs.org/u/ashwathraop)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2020, 2:44pm UTC](https://community.openpbs.org/t/pbs-failover-with-pacemaker-and-corosync/2288/1 "2020-09-22T14:44:01Z")
Hello, As we move to multi-server support for PBS, the current active-passive failover support we have would make the setup more complex as we increase the number of server instances in the complex. Tools like Pacemaker + Corosync have great community support and have much better configuration options than what we have today with PBS. So I am proposing to remove failover support within PBS and recommend the use of tools like Pacemaker and Corosync. I have written a design page with instructions on how to set up a HA cluster with Pacemaker + Corosync. Design: > **[PBS Pro Confluence](https://openpbs.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/PD/pages/2114945027/High+availability+using+pacemaker+and+corosync)** There is also a small demo available showing how the pacemaker works with PBS: > **[PBS Pro Confluence](https://openpbs.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/PD/pages/1507164161/PBS+Pro+multi-server+project+architecture+and+design)**