Dear Joe, Dante,
Apologies in advance about not replying inline to your comments.
I am getting the impression here that DRBD is being considered as a
"remote" mirroring solution which makes it seems like the secondary
oss housing the backup OST is sitting far far away making it
unreliable or inef
I'm sure you've thought about that aspect already.
Joe.
-Original Message-
From: Brian J. Murrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 05 December 2007 14:47
To: lustre-discuss
Subject: Re: [Lustre-discuss] Redundancy with object storage?
On Tue, 2007-12-04 at 17:59 -0600, D. Dante
On Tue, 2007-12-04 at 17:59 -0600, D. Dante Lorenso wrote:
>
> What happens when you try to read a file from the OST that is down?
That depends on whether the OST has been configured for failout or
failover. In failover mode, the assumption is that another node will
resume service for that OST,
Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-12-03 at 20:32 -0600, D. Dante Lorenso wrote:
>> The problem that I see is that if any one
>> piece of the 4-node system fails, the whole system will fail.
>
> Not quite. If an OST fails, only the objects on that OST become failed.
> The filesystem will con
On Mon, 2007-12-03 at 20:32 -0600, D. Dante Lorenso wrote:
>
> The problem that I see is that if any one
> piece of the 4-node system fails, the whole system will fail.
Not quite. If an OST fails, only the objects on that OST become failed.
The filesystem will continue to run and service reques
All,
I'm hoping to set up a Lustre file system using 1 MGS and 3 OST on 4
separate pieces of hardware, but I'm doing this and hoping to gain some
reliability at the same time. The problem that I see is that if any one
piece of the 4-node system fails, the whole system will fail.
Is it possibl
