[Linux-cluster] using NFS as a shared storage for RHCS

[brem belguebli]

Definitely right in saying that all those apps do definitely not need
a clustered FS.

If one of your concerns is high availability, local FS cannot be the
option unless some DRBD setup is done (I have no idea on how complex
or not it can be).

The classical way, would be to use shared storage (block device
based--> cannot be NFS) FC, ISCSI, on which LVM (CLVM or HA LVM)
volumes are built holding themselves legacy FS (ext3).

Ideally, CLVM is my prefered option, the only problem with it being
that the Redhat cluster shipped resource script doesn't handle
exclusive activation "yet" (something needed when runnning
active/passive clustered services with CLVM) and you'll need to use
instead Rafael Mico Miranda  resource script (in this post
https://www.redhat.com/archives/cluster-devel/2009-June/msg00020.html)



2009/10/13 Mike Cardwell <linux-cluster at lists.grepular.com>:
> carlopmart wrote:
>
>> I need to install three basic services on this cluster: a corporative
>> proxy (squid), MTA outbound server (postfix) and a dns slave service. My
>> problem is that I can't use noatime,nodiratime flags if i use GFS/GFS2 to
>> deploy these services because all needs this flags activated ... and I don't
>> want to use external software like ocfs2 ...
>
> Why do you think you need a clustered filesystem then? None of those
> services require one... I wouldn't recommend adding the complexity of a
> clustered filesystem unless you really have to; all it will do is reduce the
> reliability of the system. Each of those applications can work with their
> own standalone local filesystems...
>
> --
> Mike Cardwell - IT Consultant and LAMP developer
> Cardwell IT Ltd. (UK Reg'd Company #06920226) http://cardwellit.com/
> Technical Blog: https://secure.grepular.com/blog/
>
> --
> Linux-cluster mailing list
> Linux-cluster at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
>