Quoting Paul Robins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Derek, if you're reading this, i've tried yanking a drive before and
the system doesn't crash, but any disk access hangs. I wish i could
spec a higher quality controller but i have a feeling it will be
rejected outright.
This test was done on a system that used software raid? I'll admit that
my test was on a PATA system, not SATA system. It was also a while ago,
on a 2.4 linux kernel (not 2.6). You seriously can't add $20 to each
machine to get better controllers?
If either of you could weigh in on AFS on top of DRBD i'd appreciate
it, I'm not fully up on whether a second server with an identical
filesystem could be made to take over a crashed AFS machine. I
appreciate all the help so far and wish there was a way i could
donate back.
I've never used DRBD in any form, so I don't have any experience. All I CAN
say is repeat what has already been said: The namei fileserver (which is all
you get on Linux) doesn't care what the underlying block device or filesystem
you use for /vicepx -- so if DRBD looks like any other disk/filesystem then
yes, AFS can be built on top of it. Just make sure you never have the
same backend data served by two fileservers at the same time!
Regards,
Paul
-derek
--
Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB)
URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH
[EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key available
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-info mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
