On 12/29/06, Nicolas Bogucki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 15:19:33 +0100 > From: Nicolas Bogucki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [Lustre-discuss] a network RAID 0+1 with lustre?... > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Hi all, > > I am currently testing lustre to check if it can possibly replace my NFS > mounts... > > My files are spread on multiple NFS server so that, if I lose 1 NFS server I > only use access to data located on this server > which is solved with data > written twice. stable enough but not very scalable, isn't it?... > > Of cours, I expect a lot more from lustre scalability... > > I understood that I am able to... > ... write to one file system which is hosted on multiple servers > ... write to one file system which is hosted by one server and mirror on a > second one > > I'd like to mix both with some kind of mirror for each of my server hosting a > peace of my lustre filesystem. This way, I would be very scalable and still > fault tolerant. > > Is this possible? Thanks for your help! > > Regards, > Nicolas. Hi Nicolas, I believe that the scalability and fault tolerance you require can be achieved with current Lustre technology plus Linux clustering software of some sort. Define a Lustre filesystem that has two OSTs, one on each of a pair of servers. Configure the clustering software to make each server take over serving the other's OST if the other goes down. That way you (a) split the load over both servers when they're both up and (b) have access to the full filesystem as long as either server is up. This sort of approach is used successfully in HP's SFS (Scalable File Share) product.
_______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
