On 03/23/2010 07:35 PM, Michael Schwartzkopff wrote: > Am Dienstag, 23. März 2010 17:08:56 schrieb Digimer: >> On 10-03-23 10:02 AM, Florian Haas wrote: >>> On 2010-03-23 14:52, Michael Schwartzkopff wrote: >>>> Am Freitag, 19. März 2010 14:12:30 schrieb [email protected]: >>>>> Hi list, >>>>> >>>>> first of all please answer also to my email-address because I'm not >>>>> subscribed to the ML. >>>>> >>>>> Here are my questions: >>>>> >>>>> I have to set up drbd 8.0.14 (Debian stable) in dual-primary mode. >>>>> One node has to read and write while the other node only need read >>>>> access. >>>>> >>>>> Do I need GFS or OCFS? >>>> Not really if you can be sure that the second node ONLY reads. >>> Are you nuts? I thought you wrote books about this! >>> >>>>> Or would a simple etx3 sufficient enough? >>>> Yes. Mount option "read-only" in the second node. >>> I repeat my above statement. >>> >>> I'm totally baffled right now. >>> >>> Andreas: you want to put a filesystem on dual-Primary DRBD, it has to be >>> a cluster filesystem. No ifs, buts, or maybes. >>> >>> Question is, do you really need dual-Primary DRBD? You most probably >>> don't. >>> >>> Florian >> From a purely technical view point, Michael isn't wrong. If the second >> node never changes a single block on the DRBD partition, it can't >> technically hurt it. Of course, you'd need to make sure that the node's >> DRBD doesn't try to recover from failures without first fencing the >> other node. >> >> It's not wise, but it's not impossible, either. > > didn't have my best day today. Although it should be possbile I did not say > it > is wise to do.
To wrap this up: don't do this. Ever. The reasons have been mentioned in this thread. Data divergence, and violation of cache coherency. Florian
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ drbd-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user
