replicated file system?

[Kenny Lussier]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Michael ODonnell <
michael.odonnell at comcast.net> wrote:

>
>
>
> > (DRBD>LVM>iSCSI>Heartbeat)
>
> Heh.  I suspect that will somehow look familiar to Mr. Lussier... ;->
>
> He did indicate a wish to have an Active/Active rig but I believe
> that approach only allows Active/Standby, yes?
>
>
I think I have seen that somewhere before :-)

The issue with DRBD is that is is exactly like a network-based RAID 1. The
data written to the second server is not accessible unless there is a
failure on the first system. What I would really like to do is have two (or
more) servers share their local  file systems with each other and load
balance FTP and sFTP. If one server goes down, the files that were written
to it should still be available from other nodes. Something like a K-safe
file system. This would all be a lot easier if there were a shared storage
device in the background, or even an NFS server.

I was looking at ceph/btrFS, but it doesn't look to be mature enough.
Gluster may be the way to go. I played with GFS2 a few years ago when it
was in it's infancy, and it required a shared back end. I haven't looked at
it recently. Has this changed? Can I create a storage cluster using local
storage from each server?

Thanks,
Kenny
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/attachments/20120229/5881a2af/attachment.html