On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 16:29:05 +0530, Sankarshan Mukhopadhay <sankar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Brian Jackson wrote: > > [snipped] > > > hardware. At this point, GFS's SAN roots are still there, so I'd > > suggest a SAN if you really want reliable (although it is possible to > > build a GFS setup without a SAN). You can also use a regular network > > (although I'd suggest at least gigabit ethernet) and something like > > GNBD, iSCSI, etc. to build it. You can also use a firewire drive > > connected between 2 computers for the really cheap (although the > > reliability is pretty much gone at this point). > > Are these alternative setups certified or are they workable > implementations ? You're the one that works at redhat, you tell me. :) Seriously though, I'm sure Red Hat probably only supports the SAN setup, the iscsi setup should be workable (there are companies using it in production environments), the firewire, as I said, is only good for testing. But from what I understand all the linux-cluster code isn't really supported (as in approved for use on RHEL) by Red Hat at this point anyways. > > > >One thing to note is > > that currently the kernel's software raid layer isn't cluster > > friendly, so you won't have a way to do data redundancy unless your > > storage array/etc. is doing it. > > Hey, thanks for this bit of information. > > Regards > Sankarshan
