Hi, I have a question regarding current iSCSI solution and disaster recovery.. How is solved data integrity after a node failure? With AVS there is a bitmap so there is no need to synchronize a whole disk/zpool. What about iSCSI based non shared storage? AVS has one other advantage, it can work in async mode.
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Hartmut Streppel<Hartmut.Streppel at sun.com> wrote: > Hi Nick, > I was one of those who tried to push engineering to come up with a solution > for a shared nothing cluster. And I am really glad that OHAC 2009.06 offers > this capability with iSCSI targets and HA ZFS. > > Do we need AVS support? Good question. > 1. For those Linux users who "grew up" with DRBD and Linux Heartbeat it is > obviously an excellent fit to see the same architecture on Open Solaris. > 2. On the other hand: > - why introduce an additional - replication - layer, if you can achieve the > same with less, i.e. with ZFS and iSCSI? > - I do not see how the existing limitations of AVS in an OHAC environment > can be solved easily: > -- lack of persistence of AVS configuration data probably needs the > introduction of CCR capabilities > > Regards > Hartmut > > > On 06/11/09 18:55, Nicholas Solter wrote: >> >> Piotr Jasiukajtis wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Nicholas Solter<Nicholas.Solter at sun.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Piotr Jasiukajtis wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Colorado Main Requirements >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://opensolaris.org/os/project/colorado/Requirements/ColoradoReqSpec.pdf >>>>> says that Colorado in phase 2 will eliminate the requirement for >>>>> shared storage by use Marcelo's ohac-avs project. Now in phase 1 we >>>>> can use iSCSI to provide similar goal so will ohac-avs be integrated >>>>> in phase 2? >>>>> >>>> Piotr, >>>> >>>> Good question ;-) >>>> >>>> Let me turn it around and ask you (and others on this list) whether you >>>> would find AVS support useful? What other "hardware minimization" >>>> features >>>> would you like to see in OHAC? >>> >>> I think ohac-avs will be useful to provide a non shared solution for >>> VxFS and others in phase 3. >>> What other minimization features? >>> ?- iSCSI/FCoE instead of SAN >>> ?- non shared replication in >3 node clusters >>> ?- Geo AVS replication between clusters without shared storage >>> ?- I think running Colorado nodes as PVM XEN domains would be >>> interesting (at least for testing/developing) >>> >> >> Piotr, >> >> Thanks for the feedback! Anyone else who has opinions on this topic, >> please email the list or feel free to email me privately. >> >> Thanks, >> Nick >> _______________________________________________ >> ha-clusters-discuss mailing list >> ha-clusters-discuss at opensolaris.org >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ha-clusters-discuss > > -- > Sun Microsystems GmbH ? ? ? ? ? Hartmut Streppel > Sonnenallee 1 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Systems Practice > D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten ? Phone: ?+49 (0)89 46008 2563 Germany > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Mobile: +49 (0)172 8919711 > http://www.sun.de ? ? ? ? ? ? ? FAX: ? ?+49 (0)89 46008 2572 > mailto: hartmut.streppel at sun.com > My BLOG: ?http://blogs.sun.com/Hartmut > SAP Infos: http://wikis.sun.com/display/SAPonSun/SAP+on+Sun+Home > Sitz der Gesellschaft > Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1, D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten > Amtsgericht M?nchen: HRB 161028 > Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Thomas Schr?der, Wolfgang Engels, Wolf Frenkel > Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin H?ring > > > > -- Piotr Jasiukajtis | estibi | SCA OS0072 http://estseg.blogspot.com
