Hi Brem El mar, 15-12-2009 a las 17:21 +0100, brem belguebli escribió: > Hi, > > The problem you could encounter is the network and storage split brain. > > If your Qdsik LUNs were hosted by 2 arrays located in 2 different > rooms or site, each room hosting half the nodes of your cluster, in > case a SAN and network partition occurs between the 2 rooms, you'll > find yourself in a perfect storage and network split brain. > > Each room having the same number of nodes and accessing one leg of > your qdisk, each qdisk leg being seen "alive" by the nodes in the > room. > > Brem > > -- > Linux-cluster mailing list > Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster I thought about this. In my situation: - All the nodes are in the same site. - All the nodes are connected to the two storage arrays via the same FC switches in a symmetric way. - All the nodes have their network interfaces connected to the same couple of Ethernet Switches in a symmetric way via bonding. I think the probability of failing exactly the devices that should fail (5 exact FC ports in one FC switch, another 5 on the another FC switch and a "split" in the Ethernet switches themselves exactly dividing the nodes in groups of 3) is pretty small. I see you exposed your point with the idea of a multi-site cluster with the 2 qdisk LUNs placed in different sites and cluster nodes in both of them, but this is not the case. But that is, in fact, a really interesting scenario :) Thanks for your interest. Cheers, Rafael -- Rafael Micó Miranda -- Linux-cluster mailing list Linux-cluster@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
