Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 14:48:01 +0100 (BST) From: Anton Shterenlikht <mexas@bris.ac.uk> To: jkh@mail.turbofuzz.com, kraduk@gmail.com Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, mexas@bristol.ac.uk Subject: Re: cluster FS? Message-ID: <201410011348.s91Dm1n3084971@mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <D4F2247F-0FFD-4D32-A61B-FDFF39A2E2E5@mail.turbofuzz.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>From jkh@mail.turbofuzz.com Wed Oct 1 14:22:36 2014 > >> On Oct 1, 2014, at 2:03 PM, krad <kraduk@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> These are my definitions, hopefully it makes some stuff a little clearer > >Thanks for the exposition - if that doesn’t help Anton, I don’t know what will. :-) It did. Thanks a lot. >To answer Anton’s previous question, he just needs to read the PDF he cited a little more closely. HP has obviously provided some sort of concurrent access mode to their SAN, but it's only active/active if you have one of the supported operating systems. Presumably, HP also provides drivers for those OSes which provide some sort of interlock support, though again, it’s not clear just what sort of filesystems you can put on the SAN and still keep the active/active concurrency. It’s very tricky, and the penalty for getting it wrong is corrupted data, so I’d tend to put my money on an actual filesystem-level solution which provides concurrent access, like glusterfs. That just went BETA with FreeBSD support, so who knows, maybe it’s becoming a viable solution. I have zero experience with deploying glusterfs, however, so I cannot speak to that. > ok, I get it - my plans are way beyond my IT expertise (amateur). Thanks again Anton
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201410011348.s91Dm1n3084971>