On Fri, 2016-03-04 at 11:09 -0500, Marc A Kaplan wrote: > Jon, I don't doubt your experience, but it's not quite fair or even > sensible to make a decision today based on what was available in the > GPFS 2.3 era.
Once bitten twice shy. I was offering my experience of that setup, which is not good. I my defense I did note it was it the 2.x era and it might be better now. > We are now at GPFS 4.2 with support for 3 way replication and FPO. > Also we have Raid controllers, IB, and "Native Raid" and ESS, GSS > solutions and more. > > So more choices, more options, making finding an "optimal" solution > more difficult. The other thing I would point out is that replacing a disk in a MD3 or similar is an operator level procedure. Replacing a similar disk up the front with GPFS replication requires a skilled GPFS administrator. Given these are to be on remote sites, I would suspect simpler lower skilled maintenance is better. JAB. -- Jonathan A. Buzzard Email: jonathan (at) buzzard.me.uk Fife, United Kingdom. _______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
