[clug] Re: Clustering file systems, without excluding windows (From: linux Digest, Vol 56, Issue 14)

[Paul TBBle Hampson]

On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 11:25:00AM +1000, Miles Goodhew wrote:

> On 15/08/2007, at 10:00 PM, linux-request at lists.samba.org wrote:

> >Message: 1
> >Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 01:04:44 +1000
> >From: Paul TBBle Hampson <Paul.Hampson at Pobox.com>

> >[Disclaimer: This is work-related. Feel free to ignore it if you
> >would expect that answering this should be paid-consultant work.]

> [Disclaimer: I've never been inflicted with having to implement
> SAN/clusered FSes, I'm just clutching at straws here]

> >If I'm understanding correctly, I put disks in a server, mdadm them into
> >a raid away, partition it (prolly with mdp, but I guess LVM is possible
> >too) and export the partitions with either AoE or iSCSI.

> >I then put a clustered file system on top of that, which runs on each
> >machine accessing the exported block devices as local device names, but
> >distributing locking using something like DLM.

> 	Crikey! Sounds complicated. I'm not certain of what your goals are
> 	in having a clustered FS, for me, I'd just try NFS/SAMBA-shared fs
> 	from local raid-(0 +/- 1) disk first. If I really want parallel-host
> 	raid, then I'd look into PVFS. If I really need NBD/iSCSI/AoE, I'd
> 	go and read a book on the theory.

Hmm. I managed to not see PVFS before now. It's interesting, but it's
not what I want... Really, I'm not sure a clustered file system _is_
what I want, in the end.

> 	Regardless, when dealing with Windows, I'd use the simplest possible
> 	approach that didn't require me to learn much about the platform or
> 	its ecosystem (i.e. Samba share from the closest, least-utilised
> 	node - maybe you could do some DNS round-robin magic from multiple
> 	servers for quasi load-balancing if you needed it). Honestly,
> 	without any malice, Windows can die in a fire as far as I'm
> 	concerned. Any development that gets me closer to its inevitable
> 	retirement makes my work less complicated.

Indeed, that's pretty much my only solution.

If I could get rid of the Windows box, I would. I've been trying for
years.

> >For the mail spool, that looks quite safe and easy. I then throw vserver
> >in front to handle POP3 (or simply an iptables rule + heartbeat would
> >sort that one out) and I can run SMTP servers on as many machines as I

> 	... now I know you just fed some keywords into a document generator, didn't you.

Maybe... ^_^

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------
Paul "TBBle" Hampson, B.Sc, LPI, MCSE
Very-later-year Asian Studies student, ANU
The Boss, Bubblesworth Pty Ltd (ABN: 51 095 284 361)
Paul.Hampson at Pobox.com

Of course Pacman didn't influence us as kids. If it did,
we'd be running around in darkened rooms, popping pills and
listening to repetitive music.
 -- Kristian Wilson, Nintendo, Inc, 1989

License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.1/au/
-----------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/linux/attachments/20070817/312a02bd/attachment.bin