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

Re: [Linux-cluster] replication



On 7/7/06, Kovacs, Corey J. <cjk techma com> wrote:
Is there a specific reason you need to avoid shared storage? If there is,
then
you might look at Lustre which uses a bunch of host computers (OST's) as
storage engines and makes the files available to a single namespace. To be
really useful you need lots of OST's which are not consumers of the
filesystem.
The benefit is that you can add capacity and throughput by simply adding
OST's.
The bad thing is that there is no built in redundancy of OST's. They can be
made to be redundant by using other clustering technologies (such as RHCS)
but
for now, the OST's are not, by nature redundant. In the next year or so, they

expect to be able to configure OST's as raid-1 and raid-5 personalities but
it
no where near that yet (raid-0 now).

True, however, failover for OSS require OST come from shared storage,
or, if using local drives on server, you want to replicate (drbd) and
integrate with linux-ha and a stonith device.

Active/active or active/passive scenarios can both be easily designed
-- given hardware, etc.
--
Mustafa A. Hashmi
mahashmi gmail com
mh stderr net


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