[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Linux-cluster] GNBD, how good it is ?



Hi,

Just a general comment;

I spent some time getting a cluster running, in summary - for anyone interested (IMHO);

a.    x86 boxes cluster relatively easily once you get hold of the right docs / examples
b.    amd64 boxes will not cluster with x86
c.    the cluster can crash relatively easily for a number of reasons
d.    ccsd can be a real CPU hog, esp when waiting to connect
e.    after a potentially silent gfs kernel crash, there's a real nice bug that leaves your CPU floating at expected levels yet the load average is up at 15+.

Summary (IMHO);

a.    Performance is good and it does work
b.    It looks promising, yet still alpha/beta
c.    Until mirroring is implemented clvmd, it's not really replacement for NFS given the stability
d.    Documentation is severely lacking ...

I'm sure it will be good with a little more work (!) , but I was hoping for production, and it's not quite there yet ..

Regards,
Gareth.

On Thu, 2004-07-08 at 13:46 -0500, Brian Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 16:47:24 +0200, Kresimir Kukulj <madmax iskon hr> wrote:
> 
> What is the difference/development status of RedHat's (sistina) GNBD
> compared to OpenGFS GNBD ? Which one is more stable ? I see on sourceforge
> project page that OpenGFS GNBD was not updated since 2002.

Once we (OpenGFS) found out that there were other alternatives, we
thought we had more important things to do than to maintain gnbd (with
our limited resources). It was deprecated some time ago. GFS's code
however has been maintained, and updated to newer kernels, etc. GFS's
is by far a better choice as far as those two are concerned.

> 
> I also found NBD, ENBD, DRBD but these don't support client nodes to be
> mounted (even read-only) if master node is using the device.
> 
> Is there any other technology (software) that can export a block device from
> 1 master to couple of slave nodes ? Read only access on client nodes is good
> enough.

iSCSI and HyperSCSI both work with GFS, so those are options. I
suppose you'd be better off answering the question of whether they are
stable enough for you.

--Brian Jackson

> 
> Is anyone using some kind of network block device in production, and with
> what success ?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> --
> Kresimir Kukulj                      madmax iskon hr

--
Linux-cluster mailing list
Linux-cluster redhat com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
--
Gareth Bult <Gareth Bult co uk>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]