hello,
i found this on lwn,
mebbe someone in this list is interested
From: Philipp Reisner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Linux-HA mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: drbd (was nmbd)
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 12:13:42 +0100
You can find it at http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/reisner/drbd/
Hi,
On Mon, 11 Oct 1999 17:02:27 -0500, Stephen Waters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> This blurb in the latest Kernel Traffic has some status information on
> ext3 and ACLs that might be relevant. 12-18mo for a really stable
> version, but version 0.02 is supposed (maybe already) to be out very
> s
This blurb in the latest Kernel Traffic has some status information on
ext3 and ACLs that might be relevant. 12-18mo for a really stable
version, but version 0.02 is supposed (maybe already) to be out very
soon.
http://kt.linuxcare.com/kt19991011_38.html#2
--
stephen waters
internal sysadmin
amic
Hi,
On Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:58:46 -0400, Tom Kunz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Hmm, well GFS isn't exactly an improvement on NBD, it's more like an
> entirely different filesystem type.
GFS is a shared disk filesystem. It doesn't care how the disk is
shared, and one of the side projects
Hmm, well GFS isn't exactly an improvement on NBD, it's more like an
entirely different filesystem type. I was talking with Simon Horman of
VA-Research at Internet World in NYC this past week, and he feels that
it'll be 12 to 18 months until we have ext3 and/or some other kind of
nicely-w
Hi,
On Mon, 11 Oct 1999 13:55:23 -0400, Tom Kunz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Stephen (and others who might know),
> Are there homepages and/or mailing lists for these teams? I would be
> highly interested in participating...
One is the GFS team at http://gfs.lcse.umn.edu/. The other has
Stephen (and others who might know),
Are there homepages and/or mailing lists for these teams? I would be
highly interested in participating...
Thanks,
Tom
"Stephen C. Tweedie" wrote:
>
> There are at least two teams working on beefing up NBD, including the
> addition of proper connect
Hi,
On Thu, 7 Oct 1999 01:59:31 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(G.W. Wettstein) said:
>> If this works, you can also add a third machine and make a threefold
>> raid1 for added HA. Curious myself if this would work. Unfortunately
>> cannot test this myself.
> This strategy for doing HA has interested
On Oct 5, 6:12pm, Marc Mutz wrote:
} Subject: Re: networked RAID-1
Good morning to everyone following this thread. I hope that this note
finds your day going well.
> That will do _nothing_ for you, because:
>
> 1.) you can only mount it r/w on exactly one machine.
> 2.) even if
GFS link:
www.globalfilesystem.org
--
Paul Jakma [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP5 key: http://www.clubi.ie/jakma/publickey.txt
---
Fortune:
In the Halls of Justice the only justice is in the halls.
-- Lenny Bruce
Re: Multi host access SCSI buses.
GFS is what you guys want. Filesystem that will allow multiple access
at the drive level. eg 2+ seperate hosts accessing a drive
simultaneously. Seagate are co-operating to develop a SCSI standard
for drive locking. (firmware updates available).
Search for GFS o
[ Tuesday, October 5, 1999 ] Marc Mutz wrote:
> That will do _nothing_ for you, because:
>
> 1.) you can only mount it r/w on exactly one machine.
> 2.) even if 1) is ok for you, you cannot even mount the array ro on the
> other machines, because of Linux' disk caching.
Although I have to admit
Tom Kunz wrote:
>
> Linux-based software alternative to the super-expensive external RAID
> towers that have multiple independent SCSI buses. They run for $10k
> each, and you can connect multiple machines into them, which will all
> mount the array simultaneously. Any node can go down at any
; > fully-duplicated filesystem. I attended a seminar at LinuxExpo in
> > Raleigh, NC on GFS, but that looked like something still in
> its infancy,
> > and relying somewhat heavily upon certain SCSI and Fiber-Channel
> > features. I want something that anyone with >1 m
h >1 machine and any
> linux-supported disk media can use as RAID-1 data duplication.
> After considering the RAID-1 code that has come to (relative) maturity
> here, it seems like a good code base to get started on a networked
> RAID-1-type system. Basically, rather tha
s.
Laters,
--Bryan
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jakob Østergaard
Sent: Monday, October 04, 1999 7:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: networked RAID-1
On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 04:55:04PM -0600, Brian Grossman wrote:
>
>
On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 04:55:04PM -0600, Brian Grossman wrote:
>
> Has anyone tried running sw-raid1 over linux's network block device? I've
> been tempted, but not quite tempted enough yet.
I think I saw that on the lkml. There were some problems (mainly performance
under heavy load, IIRC).
On Mon, 4 Oct 1999, Andy Poling wrote:
> I don't remember the real nitty-gritty details, but someone proposed using
> software RAID 1 and NBD (network block device) to do what you're talking
> about. The ball got kicked around for a while, and I think one or two folks
> even tried it.
Couldn'
t; Sent: Monday, October 04, 1999 6:11 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: networked RAID-1
>
[clip]
> mount the array simultaneously. Any node can go down at any time,
> regardless of any cron schedule, and no data will be lost. But thanks
>
[snip]
Has anyone tried running sw-raid1 over linux's network block device? I've
been tempted, but not quite tempted enough yet.
Does sw-raid1 require synchronous data xfer for the block devices involved?
If so, can sw-raid1 be told to not require synchronous data xfer? Does it
make any sense to do s
On Mon, 4 Oct 1999, Tom Kunz wrote:
> SW-RAID List,
> This is slightly off-topic. No, in fact it might be further than just
> "slightly". I have been exploring redundant network filesystems for
> Linux, off and on for the past several months. I need something that
> will replicate a fs ac
Well, rsync isn't real-time data duplication. It's like an intelligent
rcp. What if a database got created and updated and then the host
system crashed 20 seconds before the rsync was scheduled to run? The
data is lost until the original server comes back up. I'd like a
Linux-based sof
s like a good code base to get started on a networked
RAID-1-type system. Basically, rather than sync-ing between two
physically local disks, modify the code to sync between a local and
a
remote (or more than one remote) disk. Maybe I've missed something
about Coda, GFS, or Intermezzo, or maybe t
what heavily upon certain SCSI and Fiber-Channel
features. I want something that anyone with >1 machine and any
linux-supported disk media can use as RAID-1 data duplication.
After considering the RAID-1 code that has come to (relative) maturity
here, it seems like a good code base to ge
24 matches
Mail list logo
