Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 10:11:08 +0100 From: krad <kraduk@gmail.com> To: Borja Marcos <borjam@sarenet.es> Cc: juergen.gotteswinter@internetx.com, FreeBSD FS <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: HAST + ZFS + NFS + CARP Message-ID: <CALfReycz5SNg9fCCMBb=%2Bzs_tEG10wjxBLBh2yXYQHQFbHMp0g@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1AE36A3B-A2BA-47D2-A872-1E7E9EFA201D@sarenet.es> References: <6035AB85-8E62-4F0A-9FA8-125B31A7A387@gmail.com> <20160703192945.GE41276@mordor.lan> <20160703214723.GF41276@mordor.lan> <65906F84-CFFC-40E9-8236-56AFB6BE2DE1@ixsystems.com> <B48FB28E-30FA-477F-810E-DF4F575F5063@gmail.com> <61283600-A41A-4A8A-92F9-7FAFF54DD175@ixsystems.com> <20160704183643.GI41276@mordor.lan> <AE372BF0-02BE-4BF3-9073-A05DB4E7FE34@ixsystems.com> <20160704193131.GJ41276@mordor.lan> <E7D42341-D324-41C7-B03A-2420DA7A7952@sarenet.es> <20160811091016.GI70364@mordor.lan> <1AA52221-9B04-4CF6-97A3-D2C2B330B7F9@sarenet.es> <472bc879-977f-8c4c-c91a-84cc61efcd86@internetx.com> <1AE36A3B-A2BA-47D2-A872-1E7E9EFA201D@sarenet.es>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I totally agree here i would used some batch replication in general. Yes it doesnt provide the ha you require, but then if you need that maybe a different approach like a distributed file system is a better solution. Even then though I would still have my standard replication to a box not part of the distributed filesystem via rsync or something, just for ass covering. Admittedly this gets problematic when the datasets have large deltas and/or objects. On 17 August 2016 at 09:53, Borja Marcos <borjam@sarenet.es> wrote: > > > On 17 Aug 2016, at 09:25, InterNetX - Juergen Gotteswinter < > juergen.gotteswinter@internetx.com> wrote: > > try dual split import :D i mean, zpool -f import on 2 machines hooked u= p > > to the same disk chassis. > > > > kaboom, really ugly kaboom. thats what is very likely to happen sooner > > or later especially when it comes to homegrown automatism solutions. > > even the commercial parts where much more time/work goes into such > > solutions fail in a regular manner > > Well, don=E2=80=99t expect to father children after shooting your balls! = ;) > > I am not a big fan of such closely coupled solutions. There are quite > some failure modes that can break such a configuration, not just a > brainless > =E2=80=9Cdual split import=E2=80=9D as you say :) > > Misbehaving software (read, a ZFS bug) can render the pool unusable and, > no matter how many > redundant servers you have connected to your chassis, you are toast. Usin= g > incremental replication > over a network is much more robust, and it offers a lot of fault > isolation. Moreover, you can place the > servers in different buildings, etc. > > Networks even offer a more than reasonable protection from electrical > problems. Especially if you get > paranoid and use fiber, in which case protection is absolute. > > > > Borja. > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-fs@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-fs-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CALfReycz5SNg9fCCMBb=%2Bzs_tEG10wjxBLBh2yXYQHQFbHMp0g>