From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 1 10:17:28 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B79461EB for ; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 10:17:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eu1sys200aog106.obsmtp.com (eu1sys200aog106.obsmtp.com [207.126.144.121]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15910BAC for ; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 10:17:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com ([209.85.212.177]) (using TLSv1) by eu1sys200aob106.postini.com ([207.126.147.11]) with SMTP ID DSNKVCvUnz558kOhXJ4zAHlAAANK9pjTgsUs@postini.com; Wed, 01 Oct 2014 10:17:28 UTC Received: by mail-wi0-f177.google.com with SMTP id ho1so40717wib.4 for ; Wed, 01 Oct 2014 03:17:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:message-id:to:subject:cc:reply-to :in-reply-to; bh=N7r4MxrrXIrcekcGQkG+MlfBVexufpd2gO/cBXqt2PU=; b=KcIlxVOWPe5l1GvmfLmxwoRoAHWlGXnP3u/7Jdjf9/Z0xJDuoYOorPi/0PE+3Dq/aw +LMn5nIT3Da3H3rP7JFQTEqDcOnuuVVy/T1ux3qvARTw7MB5DV/tuwesEtVPSmJIafHH raqjm+mX2NT1Krg18v50FADlgYNZn3giqqbHCDik7WXahINknhQDluz4zwBjLTCYDiod koAHLYkTmhxY7KRaj1fgVGyauNIfaTFjhZ15JqiquFPivT0/Ck+yT3fpmIizwZ3F4Qjd R0cjE1cUd7b/RLgjeFTRVGLW8uQHflWDOkvwhMSp1jOLOVRs+4nkCfDSB77wxF9oVbU6 VFeA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQms+eMIlG2C8+AbkByiRAncr7S1Qao3bXryqGepd6ad7LwVeyZvGmlj7717ZUoSDrfz68K9/tQjcmid5+eOJIEdn0ukqp8mca2xrHFtc3LnDXMAqrq3Gz+JYmf4teiWAnByGdJMGS/+4jHcwStx/EeAA8SWyw== X-Received: by 10.180.80.198 with SMTP id t6mr13323767wix.6.1412158623695; Wed, 01 Oct 2014 03:17:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.180.80.198 with SMTP id t6mr13323744wix.6.1412158623519; Wed, 01 Oct 2014 03:17:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk (mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk. [137.222.187.221]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id au4sm655264wjc.15.2014.10.01.03.17.02 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 01 Oct 2014 03:17:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id s91AH1K0084405 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 1 Oct 2014 11:17:01 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mexas@mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk) Received: (from mexas@localhost) by mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk (8.14.9/8.14.9/Submit) id s91AH1Lo084404; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 11:17:01 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mexas) Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 11:17:01 +0100 (BST) From: Anton Shterenlikht Message-Id: <201410011017.s91AH1Lo084404@mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk> To: jkh@mail.turbofuzz.com, mexas@bristol.ac.uk Subject: Re: cluster FS? Reply-To: mexas@bristol.ac.uk In-Reply-To: <201E3A2E-B33D-4C63-AD81-8FFD5C2E0ED7@mail.turbofuzz.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, allanjude@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 10:17:28 -0000 >From jkh@mail.turbofuzz.com Wed Oct 1 10:42:50 2014 > > >> On Oct 1, 2014, at 12:02 PM, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: >> >> So are you saying that the SAN model >> is not good for active/active failover >> with multiple nodes? > >Correct. SAN is active/passive. > >For more information on high availability solutions, I suggest you check out the big file server vendors - there’s far more pertinent information in their various whitepapers then you’ll ever get on freebsd-hackers. :) I thought HP was the "big fileserver vendor"... Also, the SAN array I'm using does support active/active model since 2006: http://eis.bris.ac.uk/~mexas/aa.pdf *quote* HP StorageWorks 1000 Modular Smart Array Announcing active/active support A recent web release of alternative MSA controller firmware includes important new features, including active/active controllers *end quote* Or am I confusing the issues again? Many thanks for your time. I do appreciate your replies. Anton