On Fri, 2004-11-19 at 18:08 -0800, Garrick Staples wrote: > > > Ultimately, it seems to me that GFS over clustered LVM is the way to go; though > > > all the bits don't seem to be quite in place just yet. > > > > What's this "clustered LVM" thing? Is it the same as (or built upon) > > NBD/ENBD? Does it have the 2 terabyte or 16 terabyte limits? Google > > just turns up some mailing list hits at the top - is there a "stable" > > release of CLVM yet? > > Cluster extensions for LVM. Given shared storage, a few configs, and running > clvmd, you can activate LVs on multiple machines at once. This is great for > GFS, where it replaces the gfs "pools". > > http://sources.redhat.com/cluster/ > > As I said, not all of the right bits seem to be in place yet. But I expect > RHE4 to be very capable in this department. Last I heard: Sistina (prior to the Redhat purchase) had a roadmap for GFS, which included bringing it up to, but not surpassing, the 16 terabyte limit. Since the Redhat purchase, my understanding is that this previous roadmap has been scrapped, and there are no longer any immediate plans to raise the GFS filesystem size limit from 2 terabytes to 16 terabytes - in which case, you can pretty much just use NFS, unless you're stuck with small disks or low density servers. :) I'd -really-like- to find out this isn't true.
Description: This is a digitally signed message part