On Sun, 2008-06-01 08:50:26 -0500, Wendy Cheng <s wendy cheng gmail com> wrote:
> Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > On Sat, 2008-05-31 23:12:21 -0500, Wendy Cheng <s wendy cheng gmail com> wrote:
> > > Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2008-05-30 09:03:35 +0100, Gerrard Geldenhuis <Gerrard Geldenhuis datacash com> wrote:
> > > > > On Behalf Of Jan-Benedict Glaw
> > > > > > I'm just thinking about using my friend's overly empty harddisks for a
> > > > > > common large filesystem by merging them all together into a single,
> > > > > > large storage pool accessible by everybody.
> > > > [...]
> > > > > > It would be nice to see if anybody of you did the same before (merging
> > > > > > the free space from a lot computers into one commonly used large
> > > > > > filesystem), if it was successful and what techniques
> > > > > > (LVM/NBD/DM/MD/iSCSI/Tahoe/Freenet/Other P2P/...) you used to get
> > > > > > there, and how well that worked out in the end.
> > > > >
> > > > > Maybe have a look at GFS.
> >
> > So I'd configure each machine's empty disk/partition as an iSCSI
> > target and let them show up an every "client" machine and run that
> > setup. How good will GFS deal with temporary (or total) outage of
> > single targets? Eg. 24h disconnects with ADSL connectivity etc.?
>
> High availability will not work well in this particular setup - it is
> more about data and storage sharing between GFS nodes.
>
> Note that GFS normally runs on top of CLVM (clustered lvm, in case you
> don't know about it). You might want to check current (Linux) CLVM raid
> level support to see whether it fits your needs.
As I expect nodes to come and leave the filesystem and that these
nodes all provide different amounts of disk capacity, reshaping the
RAID stuff several times a week (or even per day) won't be that much
fun at all...
MfG, JBG
--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw lug-owl de +49-172-7608481
Signature of: Friends are relatives you make for yourself.
the second :
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature