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

Re: [Linux-cluster] Please correct me if I'm wrong, but...

hmmmm.. OK.  So it looks like we can do what we want to do with or without GFS, and it looks like I was also misinformed about the cost/availability.  Interesting.  I guess I know what I'll be doing over the next couple of days then.  Thanks for all of the quick, informative, responses.  I'm sure I'll have more questions in the coming days.


Michael Patrimonio wrote:
No, it does not require administrator interaction--in the service you would add a resource for the file system. This would move the file system between nodes.

From: linux-cluster-bounces redhat com on behalf of Randy Brown
Sent: Mon 8/20/2007 16:39
To: linux clustering
Subject: Re: [Linux-cluster] Please correct me if I'm wrong, but...

Right.  That's the way I understood it to be.  Using ext3 would require us to have to umount and remount the file systems to the each host after the failure, though, correct?  In other words, would require administrator interaction.  GFS would do this automatically without impacting the users.


Lon Hohberger wrote: 

	On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 03:26:08PM -0400, Randy Brown wrote:

		in order to configure a two-node high availability NFS failover cluster, 
		I need to use GFS, correct?

	You can use EXT3; you just can only mount the file system on one
	node at a time. 
	With GFS, you can export the same file system from *both* cluster nodes.
	-- Lon


-- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster redhat com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
fn:Randy Brown
org:National Weather Service;Office of Hydrologic Development
adr;dom:;;1325 East West Highway;Silver Spring;MD;20910
email;internet:randy brown noaa gov
title:Network Administrator
tel;work:301-713-1669 x110

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