From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 10 14:23:15 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DD5916A407 for ; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 14:23:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indigo@voda.cz) Received: from smtp.voda.cz (gw.voda.cz [212.24.154.90]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E71D513C4A3 for ; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 14:23:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from indigo@voda.cz) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.voda.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 469CF43CE1; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 15:23:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp.voda.cz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.voda.cz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 11883-05; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 15:23:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from spyro.eiecon.net (unknown [213.151.77.190]) by smtp.voda.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5003E41C81; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 15:23:09 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 15:23:08 +0100 To: "Chris Haulmark" , "Eric Anderson" From: Indigo Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=iso-8859-2 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <6FC9F9894A9F8C49A722CF9F2132FC2204C9DAAE@ms05.mailstreet2003.net> <45CD6AA6.1000003@freebsd.org> <6FC9F9894A9F8C49A722CF9F2132FC2204C9DAB0@ms05.mailstreet2003.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <6FC9F9894A9F8C49A722CF9F2132FC2204C9DAB0@ms05.mailstreet2003.net> User-Agent: Opera Mail/9.10 (Win32) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at voda.cz Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: UFS2 with SAN X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 14:23:15 -0000 On Sat, 10 Feb 2007 07:54:57 +0100, Chris Haulmark wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Eric Anderson [mailto:anderson@freebsd.org] >> Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 12:48 AM >> To: Chris Haulmark >> Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org >> Subject: Re: UFS2 with SAN >> >> On 02/09/07 19:30, Chris Haulmark wrote: >> > Hello, >> > >> > I am looking into setting up a SAN with several web servers that >> > will be clustered. It would be a FC network using Qlogic cards >> > in each of those FreeBSD web servers. It would be about 5+ >> > of those web servers. >> > >> > I want to have the capability to share the same web data across >> > those web servers. I have scorched the entire mailing list and >> > found that there were some work on GFS porting over to FreeBSD. >> > It seems like that it is just all talk and if I am wrong, could >> > you have my head turned over to where I can find out how to enable >> > GFS on those FreeBSD systems. >> >> GFS on FreeBSD is indeed dead. Not enough people stepped up to help >> port it. > > I really feared to hear that! > If it was possible to use OCFS2 then thats a cluster-fs that can handle reasonable traffic. Does it work in FreeBSD? >> >> > If GFS is out of question, which file system am I recommendeded >> > to attempt to use for this SAN setup? >> >> NFS. >> >> > My first thought to use UFS2 and attempt is to allow only one web >> > server to have a write/read access while the reminder would be >> > read only access. That should prevent from lockings that is similar >> > on NFS/NAS. >> >> This will result it the read/write system seeing the data ok, and the >> rest getting corrupt data without knowing it, and probably crashing. >> UFS2 is not cluster aware. You could mount all the hosts read only, >> and >> then update the mount point on one to rw, makes changes, then back to >> ro, then unmount/remount on the other boxes. > > That's my original idea if I do not have anything else better to go > with. > >> >> That's all still a kludge to simulate what NFS will do for you. Why >> won't NFS work for you? > > I have a client who wants to go from NAS to a true SAN solution with > full > fibre channel network. I would hate to lose the opportunity for this > client > to continue using FreeBSD as the choice of OS for his web servers. > Currently, > his set up is using NAS with NFS. He complains of locking files that > occurs > too often. > > I had hoped to find more better solution and make this client much more > happier > with all the FreeBSD support that can be provided. > >> >> I agree that it would be fantastic to have a clustered file system for >> FreeBSD, and I've done lot's of hunting and nagging vendors to support >> it - but it's just not there. > > We should get few bandwagons and get in circle. It could be likely that > I could > provide access for the developers to test and get whatever file system > and other > necessaries needed to be working. :) > > Thanks for your reply. > >> >> Eric > Vasek