Finally the light came to me,
I thought that iscsi was a file sharing protocol and now I see it isn´t.
I think I´m going to implement GFS on it, (its a good oportunity to learn something new :-)
Thaks all again for your help
ESG
2009/4/20 Graham Wood <gwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 06:56:23PM +0200, ESGLinux wrote:No. iSCSI is a way of remotely getting access to a block device. NFS is a way of accessing
> Yes I agree with you, but I thought with iscsi i can do the same as with
> NFS.
a network filesystem. They server completely different purposes, and run at different parts
of the "stack" as well.
As has already been stated, you cannot do it.
> any suggestion that makes me see the light ;.)
You cannot mount ext3 on two machines at the same time, and write data. If you want to
write from one at a time, don't mount it on the other. It's THAT simple.
There is NO other answer with ext3. If you want to have it mounted twice your choices are:
- NFS
- GFS/OCFS2/etc.
The standard reason for wanting to avoid GFS and the like is the complexity - unfortunately
the complexity is required because (as previously stated) of cache coherency.
As for your example of NFS, I can tell you from experience that it doesn't work as well as
you seem to think - it is still quite possible for NFS to get things wrong, and give you the
wrong data - however, the protocol has been designed with that in mind, and you get
"sensible" errors when it detects things.
We've got NFS servers that are accessed by 1000+ clients - and creating a file on one can
take a few minutes to appear on the others, however the way NFS works means that this is
done "safely", and it will recover. Ext3 has NO functionality to do this.
So, in summary, "No".
Graham
--
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
