Paul,
We have similar demands at my customer, and with larger file systems. We
have gotten good results by placing the cluster traffic on a dedicated
interface. Once the cluster traffic (as defined in the cluster.conf
file) was placed on a dedicated interface all our stabilization problems
disappeared. If you hardware is interface limited, you can use vlan
tagging and place the cluster traffic in a dedicated vlan. It doesn't
provide the additional bandwidth but it seems to dramatically help.
When we asked the same question, the general answer from the developers
was, "it is always a good idea to place cluster traffic on a dedicated
interface." As an interesting note, for an oracle RAC installation, the
Oracle cluster traffic MUST be on a dedicated interface.
Paul Berry wrote:
Hey guys - we're struggling with a GFS setup to get our 8 high traffic
servers onto a NEXSAN SataBoy so that we can leave our RSYNC process
which we've pushed to the extents of its capacity
We don't have all that much data, its less then 1TB total. The trick
is that these files get requested simultaneously under pretty
significant load. And as soon as we get 3 or 4 servers mounted to the
SAN we get melt-downs.
We also struggled today with one server messing with the journals and
taking down the other servers that were looking at the SAN (disaster).
The broad question I'd love to hear - is GFS a good solution to get
into for a situation like this?
I'd love to hear thoughts on this, and suggestions on the right path
is this seems like the wrong one
Best regards,
Pau
--
Linux-cluster mailing list
Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
--
Leo J Pleiman
Senior Consultant, GPS Federal
410-688-3873
begin:vcard
fn:Leo J Pleiman, RHCE
n:Pleiman;Leo J
org:;GPS Federal
email;internet:lpleiman@xxxxxxxxxx
title:Senior Consultant
tel;work:301.763.3527
tel;cell:410.688.3873
version:2.1
end:vcard
--
Linux-cluster mailing list
Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
