Hi Binu and Hartmut,
(Binu, sorry for the typo of your name in my last mail)
>> * For non-PxFS ("HA-local") mounts, fssnap should work technically, even
>> though it is not supported. Care should be taken to minimize the impact of
>> the necessary I/O pauses during the snapshot process, for instance by
>> temporarily disabling cluster monitoring of resources depended upon the
>> filesystem to be snapshotted.
>
> Even for non-HA mounts, the project complexity will be the same.
I hope I understand the difference between HA and non-HA PxFS, but I was
referring to non-PxFS mounts on either node of the cluster, which I know by the
name "ha-local".
My understanding is that, in this case, no PxFS is involved - correct?
Thank you anyway for your additional explanations regarding the two PxFS cases.
Hartmut,
> Sure, UFS snapshots are temporary (see fssnap_ufs(1M)), but IIUC,
>> snapshotting an ha-local FS in a cluster should not be any different
>> from snapshotting any other (non-root) FS in that the (clustered or
>> non clustered) node may die at any time, so the snapshot will get
>> lost, right?
> Correct! But there was a discussion along the lines that this is
> unacceptable in an HA environment.
I think it probably will be for many HA-Applications, but some might live
happily with that limitation, so, as most often, the best answer is probably
"it
depends". ;-)
Nils
