Of course this method is new to me so my understanding of how lvm2 works with locking_type set to one works in conjunction with clvmd running could be incorrect.
As always, comments are appreciated.
Corey
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 12:10 AM, Jakov Sosic <jakov.sosic@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2009 14:54:18 +0100Why are you using HA-LVM instead of CLVM? Is there any particular
Corey Kovacs <corey.kovacs@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> However, I've come to the realization that at this time it's simply
> not reasonable to expect the same performance from GFS2 as my current
> setup. I have even been told from RedHat support that our use case
> (general purpose file server with applications and home dirs along
> with some data thrown in isn't really a good fit for using GFS2. Not
> sure I agree with that or even understand the motivation behind the
> comment but I am passed that now. The simple truth is for our
> purposes, I think he may be right and I am now exploring the idea of
> using ha-lvm with ext3. I'd not set ip up before this past week and I
> have to say it looks promising. Rsyncs, directories with lots of
> files etc. all behave as I expect them to, fast.
reason?
PS.: We too dumped GFS/GFS2 everywhere where we don't need the
simultaneous access from more than one node at a time, also because of
the performance.
--
| Jakov Sosic | ICQ: 28410271 | PGP: 0x965CAE2D |
=================================================================
| start fighting cancer -> http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/ |
--
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
