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

Re: [linux-lvm] HA Fileserver configuration recommendation sought.



I have the results I obtained while experimenting with > 2T filesystems
on RHEL 3 and FC 2 at the following URL:

http://dcs.nac.uci.edu/~strombrg/nbd.html

It mostly covers NBD and ENBD, but I believe you'll find some things
relevant to what you're looking for in it as well - EG there is some md
and LVM coverage.

Another alternative is Lustre.  It is a filesystem which purports to be
able to aggregate the disks of multiple storage computers into one or
more gigantic filesystems.  It isn't stable for us, but it may be
someday.  :)  The Lustre vendor claims to be able to break not just the
2T barrier, but also the 16T barrier.  We do have a lustre filesystem of
over 16T set up now, but it remains to be seen what will happen when we
actually put over 16T of -data- in it.

Another option may be the "LBD" patches.  I haven't tried them, nor even
studied about them.

On Fri, 2004-11-19 at 09:47 +0000, Gary Mansell wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> I currently run RHAS3.0 on a Dell PE2650 which is directly attached to
> an EMC FC4500 2TB HW RAID 5 unit via two QLA2310F Fibre Channel cards.
> I have EMC's Powerpath software installed to give me multiple paths to
> the disk subsytem in case of controller or cable failure. 
> 
> This configuration has served me well but is now about to be End Of
> Life'd by Dell and I need to grow the storage. There is obviously
> quite a price premium to pay for this sort of kit so I was hoping to
> find a cheaper solution for the future.
> 
> I have seen the Nexsan ATABEAST which is a 16TB ATA array with dual
> fibre channel controllers. It seems to be well liked and is reasonably
> priced but my concern is how to achieve multiple paths to the disk.
> How would you recommend achieving a highly available configuration
> with this sort of disk subsystem?
> 
> Also, am I correct in thinking that the maximum filesystem size with
> RHEL 3.0 is 2TB? Is it possible to get over this limitation with LVM
> or some other method?
> 
> Any advice gladly received.
> 
> Thanks in advance
> 
> Gary Mansell -- 
> 
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
> are addressed.
> If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the sender
> immediately and delete this e-mail from your system. Please note that
> any views
> or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author
> and do not necessarily represent those of Ricardo (save for reports
> and other
> documentation formally approved and signed for release to the intended
> recipient). Only Directors or Duly Authorised Officers are authorised
> to 
> enter into legally binding obligations on behalf of Ricardo unless the
> obligation is contained within a Ricardo Purchase Order.
> 
> Ricardo may monitor outgoing and incoming e-mails and other
> telecommunications on its e-mail and telecommunications systems. By
> replying to
> this e-mail you give consent to such monitoring. The recipient should
> check e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses. Ricardo 
> accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by
> this e-mail. "Ricardo" means Ricardo plc and its subsidiary companies.
> 
> Ricardo plc is a public limited company registered in England with
> registered number 00222915.
> The registered office of Ricardo plc is Bridge Works,Shoreham-by Sea,
> West Sussex, BN43 5FG.
> _______________________________________________
> linux-lvm mailing list
> linux-lvm redhat com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
> read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/

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]