Hi Felix, On Tue, 31 Jul 2012 13:24:38 +0200 Felix Frank <[email protected]> wrote: > > I see. Quite unusual I'd say, to have two drbd nodes that each > use a NAS as backing device. But it looks sound, judging from > the config. Thanks for that. >
Thanks a lot for taking a look! I take it the strategy we've already discussed for restoring sanity applies just as well to this setup, then. > Out of curiosity: Do you gain *any* advantage from using NAS in > this setup instead of local disks in your drbd nodes? > I'd like to point out that the drbd latency cost per write in > this setup is probably (RTT between nodes) + (RTT between > secondary and NAS), which may be small overhead, but > potentially sub-optimal nontheless. > That's an interesting point. This is the only time I've ever worked with DRBD, and I inherited these servers - so I can't compare. My personal preference would certainly be to use local disk, if only to circumvent the need for additional cabling and switches. James -- James Gibbon <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ drbd-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user
