From owner-freebsd-cluster Tue Dec 10 7: 8:38 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-cluster@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88C7A37B401 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:08:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from heaven.gigo.com (heaven.gigo.com [64.57.102.22]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFA7043EC5 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:08:35 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from lioux@brturbo.com) Received: from 200-193-224-224-bsace7003.dsl.telebrasilia.net.br (200-193-224-224-bsace7003.dsl.telebrasilia.net.br [200.193.224.224]) by heaven.gigo.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F786B916 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:08:23 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 20976 invoked by uid 1001); 10 Dec 2002 14:56:15 -0000 Message-ID: <20021210145615.20975.qmail@exxodus.fedaykin.here> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:55:53 -0200 From: Mario Sergio Fujikawa Ferreira To: Andy Sporner Cc: freebsd-cluster@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sharing files within a cluster References: <200212101257.gBACvv609153@splat.grant.org> <3DF5EB88.9090409@nentec.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3DF5EB88.9090409@nentec.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.7-STABLE X-Disclaimer: I hope you find what you are looking for... in life :) Sender: owner-freebsd-cluster@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 02:26:10PM +0100, Andy Sporner wrote: > Michael Grant wrote: > > >Bob Bishop wrote: > > However, what's wrong with this if you also failover NFS??? I wrote > this to another > recipient privately, but I put this here too as a possible scenario... > > I am also looking into the porting of the drbd code that Bob Bishop > mentioned earlier. I am not a real "Fan" of the idea of shared SCSI. > I have seen it work and have worked on such systems, but it has some > very significant drawbacks. I like the idea of a network distributed > collection of raw devices that can be brought together in a VINUM > kind of way so that redundancy is assured. I have no problem with > NFS as long as the underlying backing store is redundant. Then the > NFS server can fail to anywhere in the cluster. Take this example. I might be saying something foolish but have any of you investigated GEOM? It might be possible to write an abstraction layer for it that will enable some of the necessary features: - localization transparency - distribution - disconnected mode - blabla... unfortunaly, FreeBSD based only as GEOM is only supported for FreeBSD for now - GEOM's Author Page http://www.freebsd.org/~phk/Geom/ - Status Report on GEOM http://www.freebsd.org/news/status/report-sept-2002-oct-2002.html#GEOM---generalized-block-storage-manipulation - FreeBSD GEOM man page http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=geom&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=FreeBSD+5.0-current&format=html Regards, -- Mario S F Ferreira - DF - Brazil - "I guess this is a signature." Computer Science Undergraduate | FreeBSD Committer | CS Developer flames to beloved devnull@someotherworldbeloworabove.org feature, n: a documented bug | bug, n: an undocumented feature To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-cluster" in the body of the message