Fabian Arrotin wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 12:49 -0700, Dan Trainor wrote:
>
> > >
> > > For the backend storage, it depends what's your budget ... :o)
> > > A minimal setup is to use nfs on a central server to host/share
> > > the same data across all your machines ... the problem in this
> > > config is that the nfs server becomes the single point of failure
> > > ... so why not using a simple heartbeat solution for 2 nfs
> > > servers acting as one and uses drdb between these 2 nodes for the
> > > replication ...
> > > Other method is to have a dedicate san with hba in each
> > > webservers but that's another budget ... :o)
> > >
> > > Just my two cents ...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > HI, Fabian -
> >
> > I've been toying aroudn with both NFS and GFS, but NFS does leave me
> > with a single point of failure. I'd rather not use something like
> > drdb, however. I'm still researching GFS to see if it's a viable
> > alternative for what I'm looking for.
> >
> > Thanks!
> > -dant
>
> GFS can do the job, but in this case you should have a real shared
> storage to permit all the servers to access the shared data in the
> same time ...
> If you don't want to invest a lot, you can still use iscsi but the
> single point of failure still exists ...
It tends to be expensive to do away with all points of failure. The
best you can do on a budget is try to limit your points of failure to
things that tend to have a long lifespan (i.e. almost anything other
than servers and individual hard drives).
For another (relatively) low-cost option, check out the AoE storage
appliances from Coraid.com. Mine is still in testing, but it was very
easy to configure with CentOS4 and I haven't found any problems with
it so far. I currently have a 1.2TB storage area shared between three
CentOS servers with GFS.
--
Bowie
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
