Boris Epstein writes:
> Hello listmates,
>
> This is not specifically CentOS-related - though I will probably execute
> this design on CentOS if I decide to do so. It will certainly be some kind
> of Linux.
>
> At any rate, here's my situation. I would like to build a fairly large
> storage solution (let us say, 100 TB). I want this solution to be
> distributed and redundant. I want to be able to lose part of the machines
> involved and still stay operational (the bigger part, the better). I would
> prefer to avoid having to buy large servers to accomplish this task.
>
> What I am soliciting here is thoughts, reports from experience,
> recommendations, etc.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Boris.
Hello Boris,
I'm in a similar search for a scalable and resilient solution. So far I like
glusterfs, relatively easy to setup, no meta-server required, decent
performance, but I haven't tested it thoroughly. Been playing with their
latest beta release in a raid0+1 setup; haven't managed to lose any data yet.
I'll also be interested in opinions from other people.
--
Nux!
www.nux.ro
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
