On Sun, 18 May 2014, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
> Why specifically do you care about that? Both with your solution and the
> DRBD one the clients only see a NFS endpoint so what does it matter that
> this endpoint is placed on one of the storage systems?
The whole point of the exercise is to end up with multiple block devices
on a single system so that I can combine them into one VG using LVM, and
then build a single file system that covers the lot. On a budget, of
course.
> Also while with you solution streaming performance may be ok latency is
> going to be fairly terrible due to the round-trips and synchronicity
> required so this may be a nice setup for e.g. a backup storage system
> but not really suited as a more general purpose solution.
Yes, I hear what you are saying. However, I have investigated MooseFS and
GlusterFS using the same resources, and my experimental iscsi-based setup
gives a file system that is *much* faster than either in practical use,
latency notwithstanding.
Steve
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
