Re: GFS or ???

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



GFS is primarily used in active/active setups. You may be able to get by with rgmanager if you are using active/passive, but I'll let someone who knows more talk about that.

 brassow

On Jun 20, 2006, at 1:45 PM, DJ-Kast . wrote:

Hi,

  I am looking for advice on a configuration for a portal I am setting up.

I will have 3 Load Balanced BSD web servers that will be using a SAN for storage

I will have 2 clustered Redhat boxes, 1 active and 1 passive connected to the SAN.
The SAN will be connected via iSCSI to the 2 Redhat boxes

Do I need to use GFS to mount the drives?

I am skeptical about doing the GFS->NFS export, as I've seen lots of posts of people having problems.  Can this extra step be eliminated by something more efficient for
the setup I require?

Thanks in advance

-Paul
--

Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster

--

Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster

[Index of Archives]     [Corosync Cluster Engine]     [GFS]     [Linux Virtualization]     [Centos Virtualization]     [Centos]     [Linux RAID]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite Camping]

  Powered by Linux