Mark Hahn wrote:
>> It seems an external fibre
>> or SAS raid is needed,
>>
>
> to be precise, a redundant-path SAN is needed. you could do it with
> commodity disks and Gb, or you can spend almost unlimited amounts on
> gold-plated disks, FC switches, etc.
>
Many deployments are done wi
> It seems an external fibre
> or SAS raid is needed,
to be precise, a redundant-path SAN is needed. you could do it with
commodity disks and Gb, or you can spend almost unlimited amounts on
gold-plated disks, FC switches, etc.
the range of costs is really quite remarkable, I guess O(100x).
c
Thank you for the detailed response, Kevin. It seems an external fibre
or SAS raid is needed, as the idea of loosing the file system if one
node goes down doesn't seem good, even if temporary. If Lustre allowed
for a single downed node I'd feel differently However, it does have
me thinking of buil
Tyler Hawes wrote:
> Apologies if this is a bit newbie, but I'm just getting started,
> really. I'm still in design / testing stage and looking to wrap my
> head around a few things.
>
> I'm most familiar with Fibre Channel storage. As I understand it, you
> configure a pair of OSS per OST, one
Perhaps that was a freudian slip that I titled the thread "SAD Direct
Storage" :)
___
Lustre-discuss mailing list
Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
Apologies if this is a bit newbie, but I'm just getting started, really. I'm
still in design / testing stage and looking to wrap my head around a few
things.
I'm most familiar with Fibre Channel storage. As I understand it, you
configure a pair of OSS per OST, one actively serving it, the other
pa
