On 9/17/07, guangjun.wu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Hello All, > > I have read some papers about lustre and now I am dipping into the source > code. I have some questions about lustre. > > Lustre is good at fault tolerant for fail over(in the manul's term), but not > refer to fail out failure, for example when the OST is fail stop or the > medium is damaged. > > GPFS has supportted quorum and Google File System used three replicas for > data availability, So I think Lustre should also resolve this problem. It is > important for storage service. > > I want to ask if lustre Realy has mechanism to resolve this problem or some > future plans to solve it?
AFAIK, to handle this type of failure, multi-server (OST) striping ( raid 1, 5 or 6 ) is required which will be supported in Lustre 2.0 onward. Current Lustre depend on (multi-port) storage device with high availability features. You can use DRDB* setup for all OSTs if u want software only solution to have some high availability. But I not sure this type of setup is supported by cfs or not. --pravin. [*] Distributed Storage which is just introduced to Linux kernel is promising alternative to DRBD, not sure how stable it is. > > I would be appreciated for any reply! Thanks. > > ----------------------- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > _______________________________________________ > Lustre-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-devel > > _______________________________________________ Lustre-devel mailing list [email protected] https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-devel
