Server 1 is the main server and server 2 is the backup server.
This is my set up now.
Each is running Centos 5.3
I have virtualization set up on them so this is the setup:
Dom0
These are the quests.
- Samba 1 with 3 terabyte block device
- Samba 2 with 2 terabyte block device
- Samba 3 with 2 terabyte block device
- Lotus Domino 3 terabyte block device.
I want to keep the guests the same on each server.
I will start with the backup server. I will go on each vm and delete this FS and block device.
I then want make that whole 10 terabyte raid into one gfs and then re-attach it back to each guest.
Is that possible or do I have to start all over again? If it can be done I then will sync the date from the mainserver to this backup server and then switch them and do the same to the mainserver.
I have one more question which is another whole thread.
I am using rsync to sync the 2 physical boxes now. Is there a better way to do this?
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Ben M. <centos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Rich wrote:> <mailto:cgs@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> I want to make the 10 terabytes raid an xfs filesystem and then share
> the drive with all 4 of the vm's. 3 of the servers will be samba
> servers and one will be my Lotus notes server. I want to make the
> filesystem /data and then each one of the servers will use specific sub
> directories. I have it set up as block devices now but I want the
> flexibility of having the whole 10 terabytes available to all 4 servers.
>
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 1:28 AM, Christopher G. Stach II <cgs@xxxxxxxxx
>
> ----- "Adam Adamou" <adam0x54@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:adam0x54@xxxxxxxxx>>
> wrote:Though dated, this article is interesting regarding this thread. The
>
> > either nfs or ocfs2. nfs is the easiest route. ocfs2 will give you a
> > clustered filesystem.
>
> Except NFS doesn't follow normal filesystem semantics and you can
> end up with corrupt data without knowing it, and it, along with
> CIFS, will give you a free shitload of network overhead to go along
> with your possibly corrupt data. OCFS2 or GFS are the only practical
> choices if you want it to behave like a typical filesystem and not
> have to worry about catering to it or rewriting software and/or
> reeducating developers, and OCFS2 is extremely easy to set up.
>
> The original question didn't specify much about the requirements,
> though. A single shared filesystem? Read-write or read-only? No
> filesystem at all? Without that information, I would at first
> recommend not sharing. It can be a lot of trouble, it's usually not
> required, and it severely complicates life when things fail.
>
> Well, there is always XenFS... :/
>
> --
article needs to be updated (Last Modified = June 2006), and rewritten
for CentOS Xen virtualization, but it looks sound upon my first reading:
<http://xenamo.sourceforge.net/>
_______________________________________________
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
_______________________________________________ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
