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

[Randy Brown]

We have ISCSI based storage and are using GFS during a demo period, but 
I don't think we can afford it after the demo period is over.

The fencing is another issue for us.  I need to learn more about that.  
I'm not sure I'm fully grasping all I need to there.  I'm still trying 
to get nfs file systems mounted on a remote host. :)

Thanks,
Randy


Lon Hohberger wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 11:37:11AM -0400, Lon Hohberger wrote:
>   
>> On Mon, Aug 20, 2007 at 04:39:05PM -0400, Randy Brown wrote:
>>     
>>> 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.
>>>       
>> One would hope that the failover process handles mounting and
>> unmounting.  You do, however, need shared storage and suitable fencing
>> mechanisms in place.
>>     
>
> ... that is, with ext3.
>
> With GFS, you just mount it on both nodes and the recovery occurs in the
> background.  Again, shared storage + fencing are required.
>
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/linux-cluster/attachments/20070822/c0197873/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: randy.brown.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 348 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/linux-cluster/attachments/20070822/c0197873/attachment.vcf>