On 20.11.2012 01:15, Ted Miller wrote:
> On 11/19/2012 12:12 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 7:48 AM, Ted Miller<tedlists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> If RHSS is not available or suitable, other suggestions welcome. I
>>> need a
>>> file system/server with:
>>>
>>> * primary function is serving MP3 files for playback in a radio
>>> station
>>> environment in Haiti
>>> * if the system goes down all your clients (listeners) know
>>> it
>>> * they know it NOW
>>> * they know how long it takes to get it back up
>>> * High Availability as the primary concern
>>> * ability to administrate via web interface or similar by
>>> non-Linux-savvy
>>> IT staff.
>>> * ability to grow file system from 2-3TB to 20-50TB by simply
>>> adding disks
>>> and/or adding 'bricks'
>>> * clients will all be Windows computers, so files accessible by
>>> CIFS
>>> * critical application is read-only
>>> * prefer a system that would continue serving files even if the
>>> network
>>> goes down (but have not found such a system yet for Windows
>>> clients).
>>
>> Is it possible to change the application so it uses http to get
>> content or uses a distributed database natively? Distributed
>> failure-tolerant systems are a lot easier if you don't even try to
>> provide filesystem semantics that require a lot of atomic
>> operations.
>>
> Application is commercial, not changeable. It wants to see a local
> drive,
> if possible. Will tolerate (with warnings) a network share. Most of
> the
> critical operations are read-only (play back a file on the air).
Then it looks like GlusterFS is your only choice. Otherwise Openstack
Swift might have worked, too, if it hadn't been HTTP only.
--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
Nux!
www.nux.ro
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
