Manish, I can say for a fact I've had a problem that ended up having all virtual ip's and the ext3 file system mount up on two nodes quickly causing the file system to get corrupted after about 20 minutes of I/O. The root cause is still unknown to me, just letting you know that I did encounter this. I personally feel using GFS for only this reason is ignoring the problem. Josh On 11/6/07 8:56 PM, "Manish Kathuria" <mkathuria@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > What are the pros and cons of using ext3 filesystem on shared external > storage partitions when each of the partitions is going to be mounted > on only one node at a time ? > > There is a two node active-active cluster running different services > under normal scenario one node mounting two partitions from the shared > external storage and the other node mounting another two partitions > from the shared storage. When one of the node goes down, the floating > IP address, the mounted partitions and the service on the failing node > will be transferred to the other node. At any point of time, each of > the partitions will be accessed by only one node. In this scenario, > What are the drawbacks or risks involved if the external shared > storage partitions are formatted with ext3 instead of GFS ? > > Thanks, -- Josh Gray Systems Administrator NIC Inc Email: jgray@xxxxxxxxxx Desk/Mobile: 913-221-1520 "It is not the mountain we conquer, but ourselves." - Sir Edmund Hillary -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
