But it is questionable if you are achieving what you planned to achieve. What was the original intent of using GFS and cluster-suite? 1. redundancy in storage / failover and loadbalancing of the file servers? Your iscsitarget is now the single point of failure in the storage, which is identical to having used only one single NFS server in the first place. 2. aggragate bandwidth of multiple file servers sharing the same files? Aggragate bandwidth using several gfs nodes to access the same data on the same iscsi target again is unlikely to be higher. After all you now have the distributed locking overhead, and you still go through the same iscsitarget pipe. Once you have the iscsitarget serve up nonlocal storage (i.e. SAN luns) and have more than one iscsitarget server, then it becomes interesting again, and then they would likely be part of the redhat cluster. d Michael -----Original Message----- From: linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-cluster-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lon Hohberger Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 10:11 AM To: linux clustering Subject: Re: iscsi-target server need to be part of cluster? On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 10:33:37AM +0800, Bernard Chew wrote: > > Hi, > > If we have 5 servers with 1 server acting as an iscsi-target for the remaining 4 servers, do we need to include the iscsi-target server as part of the cluster? The intention is to export the partition via iscsi from 1 server and use it as a GFS filesystem for the remaining 4 servers. No, you don't need machines acting solely as storage targets to be part of the cluster. -- Lon Hohberger - Software Engineer - Red Hat, Inc. -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
