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

Reply via email to