Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 09:56:10 +0200 From: oxo@rucus.net To: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: iSCSI support Message-ID: <20051123075610.GL30154@yoafrica.com> In-Reply-To: <20051122190836.D16821@chylonia.3miasto.net> References: <43824EF0.8090807@endries.org> <20051122002352.G75644@chylonia.3miasto.net> <20051122062506.GD13838@yoafrica.com> <20051122121855.J89225@chylonia.3miasto.net> <20051122160343.GB6893@dan.emsphone.com> <20051122171702.H9431@chylonia.3miasto.net> <438349C8.5020502@dial.pipex.com> <20051122190836.D16821@chylonia.3miasto.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 07:13:45PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > anyway - for already existing iSCSI devices driver won't hurt of course, > but i'm sure nobody that understand things won't invest in such > technologies. I've been looking at iSCSI, but if someone can suggest a better alternative I'd be happy to use it, as I haven't bought anything yet. I have 3 datacentres connected by 12 core gig fibre (only using one pair at the moment, but the fibre is there for future use) each connected directly to the others. I want a system that I can start off with one disk server in one datacentre, and then step it up to have mirrored disk servers in each of the other datacentre's which are kept up to date in real time and can take over instantaneously if one of the others fails. It must also be scalable (non destructive resizing of the system) and support both linux and FreeBSD. I am willing to wait for this, but can anyone point me in the right direction. iSCSI seems to be it, but I'm not sure. -John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051123075610.GL30154>